Spin isn't an argument

[cswiger <cswiger@widomaker.com>]

  "Kendall G. Clark" <kclark@computek.net> writes:
  >I heard Rev. Jesse Jackson on CNN this week say that ``exclusion is a
  >form of violence.''
  
  One of the things I learned early in computers is "Anything can mean
  anything you define it to mean" (working w/ FORTH). You want to use the
  '-' to mean addition? It's easy.  You can equate anything you don't like
  with anything morally repugnant. That my insurance company makes
  a profit is a form of rape. Eating a hamburger is murder. 
  
  Anyway, as I've detailed in a previous message, it's looking like
  the big problem is the common carrier owned by the content creator. Your 
  complaint is that by using a Netscape browser your excluded from
  MSNBC content (or could be sometime in the future). 
  The problem is that the medium is the message. Of course, ISP's
  have been very careful to differentiate themselves as carriers
  from the content so as not to be held responsible for pornography
  published in the Usenet. And of course, in fascist, totalitarian
  countries the govt. controls the media and makes sure that only
  articles in it's favor see the light of day. Gates certainly does
  understand that the big money is made in the content rather than
  the carrier. Makers of TV's and broadcasting equipment just
  survived while the TV stars and producers made a killing.
  I just don't think there's a really big threat or potential threat
  to free speech to justify antitrust action. I or you or anyone
  can publish a web site critising MS. You can use NT to publish
  articles unfavorable to MS and Gates can't stop you. YOu can
  stand on the street
  in Redmond and pass out literature unfavorable to MS and US courts
  will defend your right to do so. The people who pay for content,
  the advertisers, usually want to reach a broad audience or a
  specific type of audience, and to advertise a product in a
  medium viewable only to users of MS products seems counter
  productive. And a real closed system, like MS paying to
  advertise MS products in MS produced content viewable only to
  users of MS products seems downright silly.
  What real examples are there of exclusionary media?
  TV networks regularly bid for the exclusive rights to air
  sporting events. If FOX owns the rights to air NFL football,
  but I just hate Murdoch and his tactics and and have vowed
  never to watch the FOX network, then I'm not going to see
  much football. Then I'm excluding myself.
  
  Anyway, I need to research some FCC regulations that were relaxed
  in the deregulatory mid 80's that seems to be central to this
  debate.
  
  
  Chuck
  cswiger@widomaker.com