Public Broadcasting My Butt (YouTube available)
In the interest of fairness (or public discourse), today’s post features guest commentary from: Darren, Island Notes CEO, publisher, editor-in-chief, head engineer, and well..the guy that types all this shit out pretty much:
To be perfectly honest, I’m not entirely aware of Act 221’s most minute provisions. However, it’s perhaps accurate to summarize Act 221 as a type of fiscal hand-out to companies, and their more enigmatic subsidiaries, that qualify for technology tax credits. The rationale is that this will provide incentive for “high-tech” companies to set up shop in Hawaii. Again, I’m not any kind of Act 221 expert and you might want to check out Larry Geller’s seemingly reasonable comments regarding Act 221.
What gets me is that Hawaii Public Radio has chosen to provide their wide-reaching network for guest commentary by a CEO of a local biotech company who is obviously a stakeholder in this 400 million dollar a year pay-out, right? And the “P” in HPR stands for public, no? So how is it that Hawaii Public Radio decides that they’ll broadcast exactly one half of a debate, and not invite a representative from the other side of the issue? And this other side of the debate probably much more represents views and concerns of the public. Check it out:
Monday, March 23, 2009 Cardax Pharmaceuticals is a local biotech company that’s developing treatments for the underlying cause of most chronic diseases, including heart and liver disease – inflammation. David Watumull is the company CEO, and HPR’s guest commentator:
Believe me, it’s not my favorite task to criticize our “public” media as having been way co-opted by corporate and technocratic agendas, often to the detriment of working-class people. It’s not like I’m against babies or retirees surfing with humpbacks. And I am happy to have their less-spun tv and radio options available. Mind you, I’m not ready to give one of those compelling testaments that “public media has given me a reason to live!” (I think I recently saw this guy who says he rides his bike so he can cough-up some more bread for PBS–I hope he hasn’t compromised his diet..fasting every other day to catch Antique Road Show with a good conscience. Where do they find these people anyway?)
And where else on national television is Bill Moyers going to have a chance to bring discussions with progressive thinkers into our living room, and countless other insightful and entertaining programs?
Nonetheless, as members of the public who are asked to pay for a service billed as being public, I for one, would be remiss if I didn’t also provide feedback on broadcasts that are obviously advocating for a political agenda primarily representing venture capital concerns.
While people may have a different take on this, the marginalizing (by PUBLIC broadcasting conveniently ignoring it) of dissenting opinion–particularly one that challenges the broken status quo of free market-business as usual–well, that just leaves an odd taste in my mouth.
(oh..I lied about YouTube. It’s all about ratings you know..and that means sponsors..wealthy retirees surfing with whales..’cause they’re so bloody rich, and they, uh, might give me some dough too..
Next week though! I promise. Paris Hilton wrestling this randy group of naked midgets small people. Stay tuned!)
Aloha from Columbus Ohio!
Darren, your posts–even the “serious” ones–always manage to make me smile. :-)
My work is done here. Time for dinner and a glass of vino. Then I’m up at the crack of dawn to head home to Hilo. Ugh. A long day indeed…
Hopefully I’ll be seeing ya soon, my friend!
Tim
A punafish out of water, no?
I’m glad that smiles aren’t precluded by seriousness!
Otsukarisama deshita (um, in English = good goin’ honorable Mr. Fatigue, laidat)
Btw, had a nice non-virtual visit with sensible Jay today. He disavowed any Joe Satriani allegiance and was otherwise incredibly capable and inventive.
Thanks,
Darren
Darren,
Sitting here in Denver airport at my gate watching this white stuff fall from the sky. If the old memory serves me right I think they call it “snow”. Damn, was really hoping never to be near the stuff again. Shikata ga nai, ne.
And I must take issue with Mr. Jay’s assertion that he does not play Satriani…he posted it on punaweb a few moons ago for cryin’ out loud! Unless, of course, I’m totally insane and was hallucinating. Guess we’ll have to administer some truth serum (=beer) to Fitz until he fesses up. It might also help to have a couple guitars laying around.
Be seein’ ya soon!
Great interview, btw. Wish me luck gettin’ the hell out of Dodge, er, Denver.
Later!
For the longest time, to me, public broadcasting has not been that public. If they agreed with your position, then you we public, but I don’t see a great deal of balance in their content.
Aloha,
Keahi
NPR and HPR don’t push progressive causes hard enough, is that your complaint?
Hi John,
My complaint stems from public media’s conflicted obligation to serve public interests. The public good is mostly a different concern from corporate/institutional concerns. The former is about: liberty, community health, and justice; the latter profits largely through: public manipulation (marketing and technocratic agendas). And by the very nature of electronic media, it tends to self-propagate at a level that overpowers our human voices. Additionally, inappropriate technology is unable to consider its own non-use as a source of public health. In financial terms, community concerns can simply not compete with corporate-financed policy — that is, unless the community can organize to an extraordinary extent. So if we are calling advocacy for the public good “progressive”, then yep, you summarized it well.
Mahalo,
Darren
I don’t think that publicly financed media (meaning, paid for by money taken by threat of force from the citizenry) should be pushing your political agenda, or mine for that matter.
I agree.
However, I do think that publicly financed media (which I reckon qualifies under your definition, as it is partially financed by tax revenue) necessarily must uphold advocacy for the public good — otherwise it would be private media. To have public media serve primarily corporate interests is subversive. In that sense, I don’t see how a political agenda is to be avoided.
Mahalo