". . . But the past does not exist independently from the present. Indeed, the past is only past because there is a present, just as I can point to something over there only because I am here. But nothing is inherently over there or here. In that sense, the past has no content. The past -- or more accurately, pastness -- is a position. Thus, in no way can we identify the past as past." p. 15

". . . But we may want to keep in mind that deeds and words are not as distinguishable as often we presume. History does not belong only to its narrators, professional or amateur. While some of us debate what history is or was, others take it into their own hands." p. 153

Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History (1995) by Michel-Rolph Trouillot

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

The Argument Against Reinstating the Fairness Doctrine

I'm linking here to the article on the Mother Jones website, but this is how I've heard the argument against taking up the Fairness Doctrine stated by other 'liberals' too, including Ron Kuby.

Obama has also said that he was not interested in starting this big fight.

This kind of explains what it is Obama does want to do, which seems somewhat heartening, as he seems to realize that some kind of reform in communications must be taken up among all the other problems and issues and disasters.

[ "This summer his campaign issued an unequivocal statement on the subject: "Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters. He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible. That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets." ]

No comments: