Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

[audrey_girl]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

"The backlash is an indiscriminate blackballing of all media outlets. I think this is as destructive as the blackballing of Congress"

With the utmost respect, I completely disagree.

What you are seeing is a rational reaction on the parts of a significant segment of the American population who now realize that the stuff the MSM is peddling is worst than the poison the cigarette companies are selling. They are waking up to the fact that democracy and the republic are if not dead yet, on serious life support.

I view as what is happening and how people now treat the "News Representatives" and their "Honorable members of Congress" as something that is positive.

Their elected representatives and the bought and sold MSM are NOT to be trusted and are to be viewed with great suspision if not outright hostility.

I do not wish ill or economic harm on anyone, but I look forward to the day when most of the MSM are bankrupt and finished. That is the day when we may have a free press in this country again and then maybe a truly representative government again.

[EJ]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

"The backlash is an indiscriminate blackballing of all media outlets. I think this is as destructive as the blackballing of Congress"

With the utmost respect, I completely disagree.

What you are seeing is a rational reaction on the parts of a significant segment of the American population who now realize that the stuff the MSM is peddling is worst than the poison the cigarette companies are selling. They are waking up to the fact that democracy and the republic are if not dead yet, on serious life support.

I view as what is happening and how people now treat the "News Representatives" and their "Honorable members of Congress" as something that is positive.

Their elected representatives and the bought and sold MSM are NOT to be trusted and are to be viewed with great suspision if not outright hostility.

I do not wish ill or economic harm on anyone, but I look forward to the day when most of the MSM are bankrupt and finished. That is the day when we may have a free press in this country again and then maybe a truly representative government again.

Audrey,

I agree with Janet Tavakoli, President of Tavakoli Structured Finance who told me in my interview of her two weeks ago:

EJ: What do you see as the greatest risk facing our economy going forward and then where do you see light at the end of the tunnel, some positive signs that there could be some change in policy that will get us toward a more fair and productive economy?

JT: Well, it’s hard to say what the greatest risk is. I think the greatest risk is having a Congress that carries on printing money and covering up problems—doing as we have done now. This is a travesty for Americans. This is a big rollback in our democratic republic. I keep saying my ancestors came to this country to get away from people like this. You know, experiencing a little hardship today so that we have a better future tomorrow is something that most American citizens signed up for. We’re not afraid of that. But we are afraid of lying and creating little Princelings within our society. We’ve done it in the past but it seems this time we’ve done it in a major way. We’ve allowed the rape of the poorest people in America to the benefit the wealthiest. And I don’t understand the lack of public outrage and the fact that our media hasn’t analyzed or focused on that story. So that’s my biggest fear. My biggest fear is that we continue gorging ourselves and stop exercising and that the American people—we have responsibility too—need to read and inform ourselves. People have got to turn off the reality TV and start reading the papers and, you know, thinking.

The question remains, what to do? We can't all sit in our arm chairs and complain until the problem goes away. Someone needs to roll up their sleeves, spit in their hands, and get to work.

One way to fix the system is to support those within it who are in a position to fix it. The goods news is that these people are already there. I talk to them all the time. The danger is that either they give up and leave out of frustration, leaving behind only the Princelngs, or the majority of voters get sufficiently angry and impatient and push for strongman leadership, thus my warning on the rise of demagogery. Revolution always sounds like a great idea going into it, until the revolutionaries turn out to be even worse than the people they replace and are supposedly improving on. Just ask the people who lived through the Soviet Russia and Communist China.

I do not wish for the MSM to fail. In fact, it is business failure of communications companies that is feeding the problem. There needs to be more open and direct competition rather than less, more media companies not fewer. As media companies fail, industry ownership will concentrate further, making the problem worse.

We have great institutions in this country that took us hundreds of years of blood sweat and tears to build, but many of them have the wrong people leading them, their heads filled with bad ideas, doing the wrong things. The solution is not to tear down the institutions but to identify and build up the good people within them. That's constructive action.

Thank you for your comment.

[we_are_toast]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Janet Tavakoli:

People have got to turn off the reality TV and start reading the papers and, you know, thinking.

Herein lies the problem. An uninformed, willfully ignorant population that rejects it's responsibility to become good citizens. Democracy depends on a critical thinking population that can make informed decisions when they walk into the voting booth.

To blame the MSM as some conglomerate source of misinformation, or our representatives as some subspecies out to prey on the population, is masking the true problem, us. When we are willing to fight to change a system where the candidate who raises the most money wins, for a system where elections become a contest of ideas, then we'll get the representative government we need. When we are willing to read multiple sources of news and information and pay for the ones who report the relivant over the trivial, then we'll get the watchdogs that every democracy must have. But as long as more people can name the winner of American Idol, than their congressional representative, the U.S. will continue down the path to "a new dark age of unreason".

[audrey_girl]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Audrey,

I agree with Janet Tavakoli, President of Tavakoli Structured Finance who told me in my interview of her two weeks ago:

EJ: What do you see as the greatest risk facing our economy going forward and then where do you see light at the end of the tunnel, some positive signs that there could be some change in policy that will get us toward a more fair and productive economy?

JT: Well, it’s hard to say what the greatest risk is. I think the greatest risk is having a Congress that carries on printing money and covering up problems—doing as we have done now. This is a travesty for Americans. This is a big rollback in our democratic republic. I keep saying my ancestors came to this country to get away from people like this. You know, experiencing a little hardship today so that we have a better future tomorrow is something that most American citizens signed up for. We’re not afraid of that. But we are afraid of lying and creating little Princelings within our society. We’ve done it in the past but it seems this time we’ve done it in a major way. We’ve allowed the rape of the poorest people in America to the benefit the wealthiest. And I don’t understand the lack of public outrage and the fact that our media hasn’t analyzed or focused on that story. So that’s my biggest fear. My biggest fear is that we continue gorging ourselves and stop exercising and that the American people—we have responsibility too—need to read and inform ourselves. People have got to turn off the reality TV and start reading the papers and, you know, thinking.

The question remains, what to do? We can't all sit in our arm chairs and complain until the problem goes away. Someone needs to roll up their sleeves, spit in their hands, and get to work.

One way to fix the system is to support those within it who are in a position to fix it. The goods news is that these people are already there. I talk to them all the time. The danger is that either they give up and leave out of frustration, leaving behind only the Princelngs, or the majority of voters get sufficiently angry and impatient and push for strongman leadership, thus my warning on the rise of demagogery. Revolution always sounds like a great idea going into it, until the revolutionaries turn out to be even worse than the people they replace and are supposedly improving on. Just ask the people who lived through the Soviet Russia and Communist China.

I do not wish for the MSM to fail. In fact, it is business failure of communications companies that is feeding the problem. There needs to be more open and direct competition rather than less, more media companies not fewer. As media companies fail, industry ownership will concentrate further, making the problem worse.

We have great institutions in this country that took us hundreds of years of blood sweat and tears to build, but many of them have the wrong people leading them, their heads filled with bad ideas, doing the wrong things. The solution is not to tear down the institutions but to identify and build up the good people within them. That's constructive action.

Thank you for your comment.

Thank you for your courteous response. I have tremendous respect for you and for this little island of sanity you have carved out of the web.

Re your response -

I am aware of the historical precedents to today's situation and in no way want to proceed down the path you describe, but this is the path we are on and we are being guided down it the actions taken by our current leadership in both parties and by the MSM (no matter if their intent is otherwise) - very sad to say.

Regards -

ag

[aaron]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

EJ: Can you list a few of the people in government that you feel deserve support? I'd like to "do something", however I am so disillusioned. The only guy I can think of is Ron Paul, and he is not in my state.

[jtabeb]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Audrey,

I agree with Janet Tavakoli, President of Tavakoli Structured Finance who told me in my interview of her two weeks ago:

EJ: What do you see as the greatest risk facing our economy going forward and then where do you see light at the end of the tunnel, some positive signs that there could be some change in policy that will get us toward a more fair and productive economy?

JT: Well, it’s hard to say what the greatest risk is. I think the greatest risk is having a Congress that carries on printing money and covering up problems—doing as we have done now. This is a travesty for Americans. This is a big rollback in our democratic republic. I keep saying my ancestors came to this country to get away from people like this. You know, experiencing a little hardship today so that we have a better future tomorrow is something that most American citizens signed up for. We’re not afraid of that. But we are afraid of lying and creating little Princelings within our society. We’ve done it in the past but it seems this time we’ve done it in a major way. We’ve allowed the rape of the poorest people in America to the benefit the wealthiest. And I don’t understand the lack of public outrage and the fact that our media hasn’t analyzed or focused on that story. So that’s my biggest fear. My biggest fear is that we continue gorging ourselves and stop exercising and that the American people—we have responsibility too—need to read and inform ourselves. People have got to turn off the reality TV and start reading the papers and, you know, thinking.

The question remains, what to do? We can't all sit in our arm chairs and complain until the problem goes away. Someone needs to roll up their sleeves, spit in their hands, and get to work.

One way to fix the system is to support those within it who are in a position to fix it. The goods news is that these people are already there. I talk to them all the time. The danger is that either they give up and leave out of frustration, leaving behind only the Princelngs, or the majority of voters get sufficiently angry and impatient and push for strongman leadership, thus my warning on the rise of demagogery. Revolution always sounds like a great idea going into it, until the revolutionaries turn out to be even worse than the people they replace and are supposedly improving on. Just ask the people who lived through the Soviet Russia and Communist China.

I do not wish for the MSM to fail. In fact, it is business failure of communications companies that is feeding the problem. There needs to be more open and direct competition rather than less, more media companies not fewer. As media companies fail, industry ownership will concentrate further, making the problem worse.

We have great institutions in this country that took us hundreds of years of blood sweat and tears to build, but many of them have the wrong people leading them, their heads filled with bad ideas, doing the wrong things. The solution is not to tear down the institutions but to identify and build up the good people within them. That's constructive action.

Thank you for your comment.

I'm having a VERY hard time envisioning something other than a descent into facism, could you please provide us with some uplifting stories of anyone making any progress in reforming the system? I can't find any, that's why I'm asking.

The difficulty I see is that the further things deteriorate, the more dependant people become on the system to provide things like food or shelter. Doesn't seem like the environment where an enlightenment occurs. I do agree that the local reality is collapsing at breakneck speed, which is postive, question is will there be anyone left to do ANYTHING when the truth is layed bare.

Once the world learns how broke we are (and we accept how broke we really are) do people panic and look for the knight on the white horse, or do people look for ways to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

An overweight, overconsuming populace seems unlikely to ask for the "pain" and very likely to answer the call of the dictator that claims "I will feed you and cloth you and make things right".

Sorry, just don't see much (besides the people of this country, and I mean that from my heart) worth preserving.

How to change, how to change? I'm open to actionable ideas, anyone got any?

[thunderdownunder]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Ok time for a recap (with or without tin foil hats )

Seems to be the latest news that I can find.

http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=e...&theme=&size=A

This raises a point I had to deal with today - after 2 weeks a dead rat under the floor of the kitchen sink - well - STANK. As does this sad little story.
I offer only these observations, so feel free to find holes in the logic.

The Largest Fraud in History

- Takes two weeks to tell us basically nothing.

- Largely unreported by US media even to date. CNN, FOX, ABC, CBS, NBC, NY Times, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, the WSJ and ALL THE REST do not see this story as news worthy? Bloomberg's did a report filed under "conspiricy witch hunt" parameters via Phil Black and William Pesek on 6/17/09

- People who counterfeit sovereign states Bonds/ Banknotes are usually arrested,deported and jailed forever. These fellows released ??? They had a get out of jail card from someone.

-The US Government has taken NO ACTION on what could destabilize the entire world bond market. Gee, I wonder why? Might the authorities know they're real and be just a wee bit nervous that disclosure of a sovereign attempting to covertly dump nearly $140 billion in debt could cause a wee bit of panic, given that we're running nearly $200 billion a month in deficits?

-To date NO definite announcement has been made by the SEC on the serial numbers, real or fake has been made. Only someone ( US Treasury spokesman Meyerhardt) that according to what they have "seen" they are fake.

- Though the smugglers have been identified in the press as “Japanese nationals” there has yet to be any confirmation if the smugglers were indeed Japanese or of some other ethnicity. How difficult is it to confirm the ethnicity of the smugglers and why is this information being kept secret?

- The bearer bonds were discovered in a hidden briefcase compartment after a customs inspection. Again, if the bonds were indeed authentic and owned by a nation state, they could have been transported in a diplomatic pouch exempt from customs searches that would have guaranteed transport without detection.

- One of the quickest ways to sabotage and usher in the death of a currency is to raise legitimate questions about its ability to withstand counterfeiting efforts. Prove that counterfeiting is not only possible but highly likely, and the world’s confidence in the sabotaged currency will undoubtedly plummet. Again US Government action is visibly underwhelming ???

- Another discrepancy is the fact that, along with the securities, original and recent bank documents were seized as proof of their authenticity.

-June 10th - “We have complete trust in the fact that the U.S. views its strong-dollar policy as fundamental,” Yosano, 70, said in an interview in Tokyo on June 10 before attending a Group of Eight meeting of finance ministers starting today in Italy. “So our trust in U.S. Treasuries is absolutely unshakable.” and the seizure story broke 2 days earlier.

- Ponder the sheer impossibility of cashing a fake $500 million bond. Why would you bother with such a scam. Expensive and totally futile. But they exist for a reason (and don't give me crap about Italian mafia or Osama bin dead lately.)

- To add some balance here, there have been stories about fake bearer bonds coming out of North Korea and other places for years. But the idiocy of attempting to pass a $500 million certificates belies this possibility - who in the name of God would take such a thing and give you anything for it without authenticating it first? While bearer instrument are "anonymous" in terms of who owns them, their authenticity is easily verified as they ARE serialized instruments. To Date this has not been done officially ?? why not

- Fake or Real IT DOESN'T MATTER not a jot What matters is the deafening silence on a matter which requires the swiftest action by all parties, who ever they are. The Implication are just to far reaching to allow this thing to fester.

Which brings me back to the dead rat under the kitchen - it Stinks and its not going away nor the smell. Much as its going to cost to repair the damage caused by the demolition of the kitchen. Its either bury the Rat or leave the house.
I would suggest that the US Government get out the Wreaking Bar forthwith as its your house and This dead rat is going to continue to fester and make life uncomfortable for all who live in it.
or
It could be just a Japanese Reality TV show and we can all get back to mowing the lawn. (this I pray)

NB: some of the points above are "Cut and pastes" from various sites which reflect my views. The authors are numerous and the comments sensible. please accept this as thanks for useage.

[marvenger]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

I think you're trying to be too smart. The MSM is promoting the demagogery, and we the public need to be highly critical of this AND support those more enlightened . Otherwise how in God's name are all the idol watchers going to figure out whats going on.

[Tybee Island]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Respectfully, I think the "Mainstream Public" is getting just what they want from the "Main Street Media." The programming chiefs and producers serve their advertisers to be certain, but the shows have to sell to a watching and buying audience. If the numbers aren't there, the show is gone and the next great idea is thrust upon them, be it reality shows, or reruns of Bonanza (the latter a bit less to be sure).

In my personal reflection on this topic, I am sad to say that I have little to no confidence in the Mainstream Public to do the right thing, let alone be vocal about the quality of watered down gruel they are being served. Instead, they just ask for more and suspend their critique of its quality and are upset when its distribution is interrupted.

I have become far less interested in working to enlighten the Mainstream Public and far more interested in trying to avoid them. I have made changes in my life to protect my family over the past few years that center around safety, strategic options when faced with inevitable political upheaval and securing my wealth.

Do I lament what has become of our media and the reflection it makes upon our country? Absolutely, as much as any other intellectually aware citizen. However, it has come down to priorities and making sure that each hour I spend, is used to accomplish an achievable long term and/or near term goal, after carefully weighing the odds for a successful outcome and an evaluation of the variables that affect each task. The Mainstream Public is not a variable that I can adequately underwrite.

You might describe me as a "pessimist" and you would be wrong. I am the most ardent of optimists, perhaps better descried as a "tragic optimist."

[Chris Coles]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Audrey,

I agree with Janet Tavakoli, President of Tavakoli Structured Finance who told me in my interview of her two weeks ago:

EJ: What do you see as the greatest risk facing our economy going forward and then where do you see light at the end of the tunnel, some positive signs that there could be some change in policy that will get us toward a more fair and productive economy?

JT: Well, it’s hard to say what the greatest risk is. I think the greatest risk is having a Congress that carries on printing money and covering up problems—doing as we have done now. This is a travesty for Americans. This is a big rollback in our democratic republic. I keep saying my ancestors came to this country to get away from people like this. You know, experiencing a little hardship today so that we have a better future tomorrow is something that most American citizens signed up for. We’re not afraid of that. But we are afraid of lying and creating little Princelings within our society. We’ve done it in the past but it seems this time we’ve done it in a major way. We’ve allowed the rape of the poorest people in America to the benefit the wealthiest. And I don’t understand the lack of public outrage and the fact that our media hasn’t analyzed or focused on that story. So that’s my biggest fear. My biggest fear is that we continue gorging ourselves and stop exercising and that the American people—we have responsibility too—need to read and inform ourselves. People have got to turn off the reality TV and start reading the papers and, you know, thinking.

The question remains, what to do? We can't all sit in our arm chairs and complain until the problem goes away. Someone needs to roll up their sleeves, spit in their hands, and get to work.

One way to fix the system is to support those within it who are in a position to fix it. The goods news is that these people are already there. I talk to them all the time. The danger is that either they give up and leave out of frustration, leaving behind only the Princelngs, or the majority of voters get sufficiently angry and impatient and push for strongman leadership, thus my warning on the rise of demagogery. Revolution always sounds like a great idea going into it, until the revolutionaries turn out to be even worse than the people they replace and are supposedly improving on. Just ask the people who lived through the Soviet Russia and Communist China.

I do not wish for the MSM to fail. In fact, it is business failure of communications companies that is feeding the problem. There needs to be more open and direct competition rather than less, more media companies not fewer. As media companies fail, industry ownership will concentrate further, making the problem worse.

We have great institutions in this country that took us hundreds of years of blood sweat and tears to build, but many of them have the wrong people leading them, their heads filled with bad ideas, doing the wrong things. The solution is not to tear down the institutions but to identify and build up the good people within them. That's constructive action.

Thank you for your comment.

In one very real respect, as an Englishman, it is difficult to contemplate a free nation without a Main Stream Media, (MSM), with whom the majority of the thinking citizens, (perhaps no more than 5 -% of the population), can feel comfortable. Almost my entire adult lifetime I have listened to the likes of John Humphrys on Radio 4 Today http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/default.stm such as this morning with his biting report from Packistan.

Why unity is vital for Pakistan's survival After 9/11, George Bush told the world "you're either with us or against us". John Humphrys reports on how Pakistan has been struggling to reconcile with this request to take sides in the so-called "War On Terror".

You can say I am biased, but the answer to my mind is not the individuals but the ethos of the institutions. It is the ethos that seeks out the people to deliver what is needed. This is the ethos of the BBC; may I suggest that we take this document and use it as an intitial template to create the discussion that MUST take place, if any of you are going to be able to lead the United States out of the dark passage it inhabits today.

http://www.bbccharterreview.org.uk/f...rtham_Jean.rtf

BBC CHARTER REVIEW CONSULTATION

The BBC’s contribution to the life of the UK and the wider world.
The BBC has played a central role in the development of democracy in the UK, is an immensely important means of communication in the wider world, and, through its reputation for integrity, independence and quality, contributes immeasurably to the influence and standing of the UK throughout the world.


The BBC came into being six years before the UK achieved full adult suffrage and from the beginning realised its unique potential for helping to build an informed, cohesive democracy and an active, socially responsible style of citizenship. The BBC saw the importance of broadcasting, on one hand, as a means by which people in positions of power – such as governments and monarchs - could speak directly to the population, and, on the other hand, as a way of giving voice to the diversity of ways of life in the UK so that rural and urban, North and South, government and governed, might hear each other and come to share certain core values and cultural endeavours. It is remarkable how the BBC has developed and adapted to constantly changing circumstances over its eighty-two year history to continue to provide a forum – Reith’s ‘city square of old’ – for the sharing of experience, information, ideas, opinions and pleasures, thus encouraging a sense of community, citizenship and social cohesion. In the 1960s and 1970s, for example, the BBC played a significant part in the democratisation of higher education by helping to set up the Open University, which has become the model for OUs in many other countries. I was one of the first beneficiaries of this imaginative initiative by being among the very first students to enrol and graduate, feats which would have been impossible for me otherwise, for reasons of family responsibility and geography. More recently, the BBC has responded to globalisation and shifting generational, regional and national identities in a variety of ways, some technological, such as the internet and new digital radio and television channels, some artistic, through the content, style and scheduling of programmes.
The BBC’s commitment to public service broadcasting has always included children, with the same attention to diversity and inclusion as in adult programming. I have recently completed an MA dissertation on BBC television programmes for young children and was struck by the ways in which they reflect social change over the years, while consistently maintaining a model of community life which works through such virtues as cooperation, helpfulness, and a public-spirited sense of responsibility. This commitment to children, and the values portrayed in the programmes, are special features of UK broadcasting, grow out of the ethos of the BBC, and play an important part, I would argue, in inducting children into a distinctively British culture.
Over the next ten years, as globalisation continues to transform boundaries and people’s allegiances become, on one hand, more global, and on the other, perhaps more local, specific, and segmented, social cohesion and shared cultural values will be under greater pressure than ever. It seems to me of the greatest importance that the BBC should remain strong, independent and integrated, and accessible to all. The BBC’s handling of change and diversity while maintaining a consistent ethos, a broad appeal, and an impressive degree of public trust – in the wider world as well as the UK– are precisely what will be needed in a time of uncertainty and rapid change.
The BBC and Public Service Broadcasting.
I believe that the BBC plays an essential part in setting standards and encouraging variety and experiment in public service broadcasting. The standards achieved by the BBC set benchmarks for other broadcasters, especially those with a PSB remit. It has shown, for instance, how popular and worthwhile – profitable, even – quality programmes for young children can be. Gradually, commercial channels are following the BBC’s lead, including some channels in the USA, where producers of young children’s programmes have traditionally found funding very difficult. The breadth of the BBC’s output is a measure of the variety possible within a PSB remit. By providing programmes for minority as well as majority interest groups, and experimenting with new forms of programme, (for instance, factual and comedy), the BBC pushes out the boundaries, develops tastes and creates mass audiences for previously minority interest programmes, in, for example, history and Mozart’s music. I believe that the standards achieved by Channel 4 build upon the foundations laid by the BBC’s PSB remit.
What I value most.
Chiefly, I value the BBC’s wide variety of programmes, its availability to all, its reliability and integrity, the lack of advertising and other signs of commercially-driven values, and the way in which it differentiates its output on radio and television in response to – or anticipation of – differing needs, regions and tastes, while never losing sight of its UK context. I tune into the BBC for unbiased information, and sound reporting of opinions. Its array of talent is amazing. To listen every day to presenters of the quality of, for instance, Bridget Kendall, John Humphrys, Andrew Marr, Fergal Keene, Alistair Cooke, Lindsey Hilsum, Jenni Murray or Jeremy Paxman, is a delight.
I particularly appreciate drama, current affairs, history, arts, children’s programmes and the BBC’s coverage of national celebrations and commemorations.
How should the BBC adapt?
It is essential that digital/Freeview reception is rapidly made available to all viewers and listeners. In Huxham we can only receive BBC 1 and 2, ITV1 and Channel 4. Satellite reception is not an option for everyone. As audiences fragment, it is important that a strong, independent BBC ethos upholds quality, balance and coherence across its diversified output, as a kind of national core to the many other channels on offer. I note that, in a context of many competing providers, it will be increasing difficult to maintain the nine o’clock watershed to protect children, and am glad that the BBC is in an excellent position to set a firm example of good practice.
I often access the BBC website, and commend its initiatives in, for instance, encouraging creative writing, and gathering memories of World War II into an invaluable historical resource. These pioneering ventures into the interactive possibilities of the internet will no doubt be developed.
The BBC could develop its activities into the burgeoning field of Cultural and Media Studies, perhaps using the web as a service to students. Too many programmes have been wiped, and when I inquired about its archive of videos of children’s series I was put through to the BFI where the stock sounded abysmal.
Commercial activities
Radio and television form part of a pattern of media provision, in which the dividing lines are blurred. For instance, I watch gardening programmes, buy the magazine, and seek advice from the problem-page contributors by e-mail. Buying clothes, toys and books about programmes is part of the way in which children enjoy the programmes and carry the ideas and themes into their play. While I think that the BBC needs to keep a watch on commercial activities, they are integral to the viewing/listening experience, and subsidise other programmes. To fulfil its obligations to the population as a whole, the BBC needs to maintain its audience share and provide some programmes with mass appeal and engaging spin-offs, so it must be allowed some leeway in relation to competitive and commercial activities, though marketing, scheduling and trailing should not become too aggressively competitive. Happily, commercial considerations do not dictate BBC programme content, as often happens with commercial channels.
Financing.
I see no alternative to the licence fee. It is this that makes the BBC available to all and lies at the root of its public service remit to the whole population. The phrase ‘hypothecated tax’ is tendentious, all too readily usable as a campaign slogan by vested interests which stand to gain from a commercial free-for-all in broadcasting. We pay numerous such flat-rate fees, regardless of amount of use or level of income, for connection to a range of services, including electricity supplies, telephone lines and sewers. We can escape payment by doing without television, electricity, telephones or - as we do in Huxham – mains drainage.
Governance, regulation and accountability.
I should like to see the current arrangements for a Board of Governors continued, albeit perhaps with more explicit terms of reference, a clearer structure of responsibilities for regulation, and wider, more democratic representation. Currently, regulation acts as an essential aspect of developing the ethos, remit and policy of the BBC, and feeds into the creative process of change and development. I should not like to see it separated. The work of the Governors would benefit from the establishment of a House of Lords Select Committee for Culture, Media and Sport.
There could be more transparency and communication between governors and licence-payers, perhaps through the internet. By this means, we could know who they are and what they do, for instance, and they could know what we think about it.
Jean Northam

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/purpose/what.shtml

[Sharky]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

You're kidding about the BBC, right? Aren't they one of the most notoriously government controlled media outlets in the entire world?

In fact, isn't media in the UK in general among the most government controlled anywhere? Or maybe it's not as visible from the inside as it is from the outside?

[metalman]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

You're kidding about the BBC, right? Aren't they one of the most notoriously government controlled media outlets in the entire world?

In fact, isn't media in the UK in general among the most government controlled anywhere? Or maybe it's not as visible from the inside as it is from the outside?

[Chris Coles]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

You're kidding about the BBC, right? Aren't they one of the most notoriously government controlled media outlets in the entire world?

In fact, isn't media in the UK in general among the most government controlled anywhere? Or maybe it's not as visible from the inside as it is from the outside?

If that is truly what you believe then I suggest that you tune in and listen to Radio 4 Today for a few weeks and listen to the way BBC radio interviews our politicians. http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/default.stm

And, to add to that, I have lost count of the foreign individuals that have commented on the fact that the one thing that stood out during their stay here in the UK was the quality of the news.

Did you actually listen to this report I put up? Why unity is vital for Pakistan's survival http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8110562.stm

[Tybee Island]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

Here is an interesting article this morning on the bonds and the future of the dollar:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/e...he-dollar.html

[aaron]

Re: Rise of the Demagogues: The case of the $134.5 billion in U.S. bonds - Eric Janszen

I listen to the BBC on the way home from work every day. It amazes me how much more they are willing to push a person to answer hard questions. There is NO American radio or t.v. station that compares. If I were a politician, I would much rather jump on Fox or CNN before the BBC.

But (there is always a "but" isn't there?), they are rather liberal and green. I could never imagine them dressing down some Earthday tree-hugger spewing bullshit out of their asses.