talk chat room

escort america

sex chat directory

hot gay chat

sex encounters

usa personals

fat girls dating

speed dating in los angeles

web to date

sex chat usa

dating advertisements

yaho personals

dating clubs

matching dating singles

chatte

singles tour europe

brides russia

chats de sexo

true personals

swinger clubs in texas

sex partners online

swing lifestyle com

black swinging

online chat lines

dating a women

garage singles

houston single groups

internet sex chat

swinger nightclub

sex seeking women

dating agency free

burbank singles

solano singles

gay personal adds

sex buddy

cheap sex dolls

singles in oklahoma city

dates and dating

freedating co uk

personal mature

florida dating site

single websites

free dating for women

gothic match

www casualencounters com

singles events long island

girls for free

couples wife swapping

lebanese singles

scort

free dating

escort service cleveland

sex show me

kinky net

japanese video adult

texas personals

veg singles

air force singles

brighton escort agency

dvd women seeking women

interracial chat rooms

ts chat rooms

dating divorced man

gothic personals

dating in alabama

dana point singles

sex fling

escourt agencies

indonesian dating sites

point singles

local cheating women

hot wifes

real swinger movies

cheap cam girls

online dating for young people

quntele chat

kids dating website

sex pals

singles columbia sc

www adultchat

couple women

sex escourts

new 100 free dating sites

cowboy dating

matchmaker reviews

phone sex cheap

ashley madison dating

dating country

old man dating

gay cowboy dating

nudist friend finder

sexass

sex dateing

hispanic personals

swinger resort

630 singles

hamilton ohio singles

women who want affairs

singles professional

cheap cam girls

Business - Written by on Friday, August 15, 2008 10:14 - 2 Comments

Denis Hancock
The worst idea I’ve heard this week: forcing Internet sites to balance their commentary

Rasmussen Reports just released some interesting results from a recent telephone survey in the United States. Nearly half of Americans “believe the government should require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary, but they draw the line at imposing that same requirement on the Internet.” By “drawing the line”, they mean that 57% do not believe the government should force balance of commentary on individual Internet sites – but 31% still do. That’s still uncomfortably high for me.

You need to be a premium member to get access to the demographic cross-tabs, but I would assume that age is the primary dividing line here: I can’t imagine too many Net Geners who grew up “bathed in bits” would support the balance initiative, but I could just as easily understand how people who don’t use the Internet (or don’t use it too often), which is a much older demographic, could be drawn into supporting it.

Such people would come from a broadcast media mindset, where certain individuals could consolidate control of dominant media assets, and thus control the political messaging that the vast majority of people are exposed to (think: the one newspaper town). The internet, of course, is an entirely different animal – one where it’s a lot harder (an understatement to say the least) to get a stranglehold on the political messages being sent out. More to the point, could you imagine how much less interesting so many websites (and particularly blogs, assuming they would be included) would be if they were forced to balance their opinions… when the whole point of the site/blog is to offer their unique opinion on a given subject?

So yes – the very notion of balance on individual sites is the worst idea I’ve heard this week, even though I still think there’s a business opportunity for someone to create a site that’s far better than what we have to day in making that balance easily accessible to those that are interested. But to take a positive spin on the survey findings, 71% of people said it’s already possible for “just about any political view to be heard in the media.” It’s easy to forget how little time has passed since the majority of people would not have agreed with that…



2 Comments

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Shaun
Aug 15, 2008 11:30

I am continually amazed by the number of people that approve of government regulation on information and opinion. People that believe information distributed via radio and television should be regulated, but the same should not apply to the Internet, never cease to amaze me. Is it simply disdain for the companies that run these networks?
The Fairness Doctrine is nothing short of censorship and an attack on the free market. If the views presented by a radio or television program are not popular, the trusted metrics for those mediums will indicate it. It’s not the government’s place, whether it’s television, terrestrial radio, satellite, internet radio or blogs.

Dwayne Phillips
Aug 17, 2008 7:26

This is all about the “fairness doctrine” for radio. Meaning this is all about getting Rush Limbaugh off talk radio. If it passes, a radio station would have to carry a three-hour liberal talk show to balance carrying Limbaugh’s show. Since liberal talk shows fail to garner advertising dollars, no radio station would carry them. Hence they would be prohibited from carrying Limbaugh or any one of half a dozen other conservative talk shows.

The second problem with this it that it is a telephone poll. Some people – like me – never do telephone polls. They are grossly inaccurate.

Oh yes, if the fairness doctrine ever becomes law, it will eventually extend to blogs.

Coming soon in paperback! Help rename the paperback version of Macrowikinomics and win a one-hour webinar for you and your colleagues with Don Tapscott. Ends 5:00pm ET, August 31. Learn more.

Business - Oct 5, 2010 12:00 - 0 Comments

DRM and us

More In Business


Entertainment - Aug 3, 2010 13:14 - 2 Comments

Want to see the future? Look to the games

More In Entertainment


Society - Aug 6, 2010 8:19 - 4 Comments

The Empire strikes a light

More In Society