Comments on: Good News http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/ Our mission is to combat the unreason and selflessness that are sweeping our culture from the nihilist left to the religious right, and to sound a new ideal of capitalism and individual rights in American politics. Mon, 06 Feb 2012 03:04:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: madmax http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7423 madmax Sat, 23 Jan 2010 02:43:12 +0000 http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7423 Myrhaf & BB, Good points. I think there is alot of truth to what you say. Myrhaf & BB,

Good points. I think there is alot of truth to what you say.

]]> By: Myrhaf http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7422 Myrhaf Sat, 23 Jan 2010 01:17:25 +0000 http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7422 Madmax, I think it has something to with the fact that radio is broadcasting, whereas the internet is narrowcasting. A broadcast station has to appeal to enough general public to survive. That's why there are no Radio Dismukes in broadcst radio. On the internet, a site about butterflies can have all the lepidopterists in the world on it all day. There is a danger on the internet that the sites you read all day can distort your sense of what the world is like. It certainly makes my world seem like there are more Objectivists than there really are. I'm always stunned to realize that all of my friends and family never go to sites I live in . Hell, they don't even read my blogs. The general public does Facebook, MySpace and games. Madmax, I think it has something to with the fact that radio is broadcasting, whereas the internet is narrowcasting. A broadcast station has to appeal to enough general public to survive. That’s why there are no Radio Dismukes in broadcst radio. On the internet, a site about butterflies can have all the lepidopterists in the world on it all day.

There is a danger on the internet that the sites you read all day can distort your sense of what the world is like. It certainly makes my world seem like there are more Objectivists than there really are. I’m always stunned to realize that all of my friends and family never go to sites I live in . Hell, they don’t even read my blogs. The general public does Facebook, MySpace and games.

]]> By: Bill Brown http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7416 Bill Brown Sat, 23 Jan 2010 00:55:54 +0000 http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7416 I think it comes down to production barriers to entry: talk radio is a fairly expensive format, whereas the Internet is dirt cheap. There's also some barriers on the consumption side for each: participation in Internet debate is fairly expensive (computers, Internet access) whereas participation in talk radio is not (radio in car, phone to call in). There's also the factor that talk radio really came into its own around the Clinton era as the only way for right-leaning people to hear people they agreed with; the left could turn on the TV or read a magazine or a newspaper to read their viewpoint. When the left fell from power, the Internet had come into its own and so they turned to it like the right had turned to talk radio earlier. The right, though, had a solid foundation in talk radio and thus didn't flock to the Internet in the same manner. That's my theory, at least. I think it comes down to production barriers to entry: talk radio is a fairly expensive format, whereas the Internet is dirt cheap. There’s also some barriers on the consumption side for each: participation in Internet debate is fairly expensive (computers, Internet access) whereas participation in talk radio is not (radio in car, phone to call in).

There’s also the factor that talk radio really came into its own around the Clinton era as the only way for right-leaning people to hear people they agreed with; the left could turn on the TV or read a magazine or a newspaper to read their viewpoint. When the left fell from power, the Internet had come into its own and so they turned to it like the right had turned to talk radio earlier. The right, though, had a solid foundation in talk radio and thus didn’t flock to the Internet in the same manner.

That’s my theory, at least.

]]> By: madmax http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7409 madmax Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:29:30 +0000 http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7409 Regarding talk radio, its interesting that the Right dominates talk radio but does not dominate the internet. The internet seems to favor the Left as most of the really big blogs are Leftist. I wonder why that is? Regarding talk radio, its interesting that the Right dominates talk radio but does not dominate the internet. The internet seems to favor the Left as most of the really big blogs are Leftist. I wonder why that is?

]]> By: Mike http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7401 Mike Fri, 22 Jan 2010 21:25:19 +0000 http://www.newclarion.com/2010/01/good-news/#comment-7401 Judging by the comments following most Reuters, NYT, WSJ, etc articles about these recent events, there is a great majority out there that just doesn't have any grasp on the principles in play and how they affected the outcome. It is possible to write and pass a universal healthcare bill. Oh, it would still be an abomination, a wholesale violation of the rights of every citizen, but it could be made simple enough and straightforward enough to pass. America is governed by a morality of altruism, so if people can clearly tell how the bill takes from the rich and gives to the needy, they will vote for it, and their legislators know they are safe to vote for it. The failure of the 2000+ page monstrosity of 2009 is, as much as anything else, a case of the buyer not having any way to tell whether the product they are buying is what they think it is. All they saw were page after page of fees, boards, commissions, red tape, big insurance loopholes, and other bureaucracy. Judging by the comments following most Reuters, NYT, WSJ, etc articles about these recent events, there is a great majority out there that just doesn’t have any grasp on the principles in play and how they affected the outcome.

It is possible to write and pass a universal healthcare bill. Oh, it would still be an abomination, a wholesale violation of the rights of every citizen, but it could be made simple enough and straightforward enough to pass. America is governed by a morality of altruism, so if people can clearly tell how the bill takes from the rich and gives to the needy, they will vote for it, and their legislators know they are safe to vote for it.

The failure of the 2000+ page monstrosity of 2009 is, as much as anything else, a case of the buyer not having any way to tell whether the product they are buying is what they think it is. All they saw were page after page of fees, boards, commissions, red tape, big insurance loopholes, and other bureaucracy.

]]>