http://youtube.com/watch?v=P6nTAR2MVYQ

Will this migration, if it occurs at the significant proportion I think it will over the next five years, effect elections? Should be interesting to watch.

Good book review, thank you so much for it!

::::KBS

The BBC is nothing to be internationally proud of, it's a joke, and the licence fee we have to pay in Britain is absolute daylight robbery.

Complete with nasty little letters that they send around and the motto "Easier to pay. Harder to avoid." -- very true whether you have a TV or not! Still, I have to echo the sentiment that the BBC produces some good stuff with the rubbish; I've seen a few good BBC documentaries in my time, and never anything of the same quality from America.

Meanwhile, in New Zealand, the local "Hot Science" forum has had to move to a bigger theatre this year -- now there's an example of a successful blow for reason! Kim Hill, who made her career on the government-run (advertisement-free) Radio New Zealand, is the best argument for government-sponsored media ever, refutable only by the possibility that her brilliance might be world-wide unique (mind you, I remember Brian Edwards, who used to run the Saturday morning programme, and he was pretty good, too, in his way).

I think, too, that having one or two publicly funded sources of information and entertainment can raise the bar for commercial media. People realise there's a market for more intelligent commentary, and follow suit so they don't become known as the "stupid channel".

:-)

If you think about it, the license fee is actually about the same as a basic satellite subscription, which makes it very good value indeed. Granted, there's a lot of absolute crap on the BBC these days, but that's more the fault of successive governments forcing them to chase ratings (not to mention the sheer amount of airtime they have to fill with an ever more thinly-spread budget) than any shortcomings in the BBC's own ethos - indeed, as a sometime film-maker (and current we editor) who's had a lot to do with BBC staffers, I get the impression that they'd much rather be making the kind of programmes that p4limpsest admires - "cultural products which aren't entirely beholden to mass appeal" than the endless makeover/celebrity chef/property-value shows they're forced to make to get the ratings up.

Personally, I find I watch relatively little TV these days - even Channel 4 is going down the lowest-common-denominator route, "Root of All Evil?" notwithstanding - and the Internet is now my major source of information, usually via the BBC, Guardian and a few others. I'm optimistic that the new media, with their low cost of entry (to bring the discussion back to Ebonmuse's review!), will *eventually* improve not just the quantity, but the the quality of information we can access. It may take a while to evolve new mechanisms of trust and verification of information and sources, but as a web professional I see those mechanisms evolving on an almost daily basis.

In short, I'm optimistic. Reliable, intelligent, accessible, information-rich sites like Ebon's and yours make me more so by the day.

First line of third paragraph: "Television is not the chief villain behind the assault on reason because..."

Obviously, the 'not' doesn't belong :P

Doug

Notice that they have been in control of all three branches of government for the last six years and see what a mess we are in. I don't mean to imply that all Republicans are a problem. It is the neocons that have hijacked the GOP for their own fantastic, idealological agenda that has led to this sick democracy we have today.

As it happens, The Root of All Evil was made by Channel 4, which is independent.

Having said that, I left my last comment in a bit of a hurry, and in the few hours since I wrote it I have started to wonder if I was a bit hasty. The truth is, I haven't really looked into it properly, and that's the biggest obstacle to critical thinking.

I was arguing from emotion. The licence fee is a hefty bill for us to pay each month, and I don't personally find that the quality of the TV they show here is very good. They run endless repeats, their sports coverage is poor, I rarely find myself on a BBC channel.

But I'd overlooked the radio stations and the websites and everything else. I'll try and do some reading and come to a more rational, considered view. I might post an article on it.