Hi Platt, all
Platt:
> Most U.S. citizens get their news from TV. There are three major
> networks with nightly news and three cable networks with news 24
> hours a day, all of whom are independently owned and fight for
> audiences. Doesn't the government-sponsored BBC pretty much have
> a monopoly on TV news in Britain?
*ALL* fighting for audience. This point, that is indeed good for you,
Platt, is not without shame. A government-sponsored network (like BBC in
England, or RAI in Italy) has the freedom to broadcast -sometime- programs
without a great urge of audience. Of course, it is important to ensure
independence from the government, and it is not easy (but, tell me, are
private network that independent? Not here, where our local media tycoon is
the premier)
I admit this independence has always been the problem of Italian public TV.
But today, isn't it funny, our public TV is more independent from government
than the major private network. Anyway, I can tell that in terms of Quality
there is still no match. The best information programs (not only news, also
science, arts, culture...) are on our public TV. Indeed, the
advertising-sponsored TV's have a good success. Considering the amount of
stupid sitcoms, bla bla talk shows, unreal reality shows and so on they
HAVE TO bear in order to get their beloved audience... well, this is not a
good point for the "mass media people".... audience (Quantity) does not
necessarily measure excellence (Quality).
I think that it is good to have a system with both private and public
networks. Especially in a country like Italy, where there is no space for
dozens of networks, considering the small number of potential watchers.
Ciao,
Marco
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:01 BST