Click Here to read posts randomly
Additionally, please feel free to submit ideas, observations or any information of a random nature which maybe of interest to furthering the cause of humanity. Note that your submissions will be seen by the public and open to comments from visitors to BU. Confidential information should be submitted to barbadosunderground@gmail.com.
Goodmorning David.
Both blogs were criticising the fourth estate of of stifling articles by writers with a political slant. The BFP and you lambasted the ‘fourth estate’ on what you saw as a ‘curtailing of expressions’ and of being “bias”. Now I am realising that everyone do have an agenda. I tried to remain constant on the views I express and deal with the issues that have a ‘strange underlying cloud’ where partisan views override the real truth, where innuendos are the favoured recipe to entice a sleeping public.
In the past hours, I have realised that my submissions have been placed on moderation by the other blog. Information that I have been submitting are based on actual finding, real research that are linked to reports published in various papers. What I can say is, I never accused anyone of being ‘different” sexually or otherwise, I never using vile remarks or threatening statements to get over a point. Maybe, this is not the view of a blog, it seems that a commenter must be harsh, rude and crude and most of all a’DLP supporter”. This is where the problem lies with the BFP especially. I mentioned in one of my submissions that the commenters are 95% DLP supported writers and I feel that the refusal of my submission is by no means a moderating or a ‘spam’ problem, but a deliberate attempt to silence a writer. The elections has not be won and this is just a manifested behaviour of things to come.
If this article is not printed, I can firmly say, Freedom of information and ideals are being challenged.
Frankology
We cannot speak to the editorial policy of other media. What we can say is that BU is committed to freedom of expression, however since the start-up of our blog we realize that to be committed to freedom of expression is one thing but the day to day management of the blog to ensure it has a ‘clarity of purpose’ and that the message we wish to have resonate remains constant has to be defended from time to time. Regrettable we have had to can some comments which in our judgment was leading BU down a path to lalaland.
David
My family and I were on our way to Sheraton Centre on Saturday, 12th January, 2008 when we happened upon a motorcade being conducted by the BLP. Staying safely behind the motorcade in an effect to avoid breaking their congaline possession we were noticed by the last jeep which was driver by a woman whom we did not know. She, feeling threatened by the fact that our family car bore the DLP slogan and a picture of Thompson, she beckoned to the ‘trouble threes’ of the motorcade that we were causing her some discomfort.
By the time we reach St. Barnabus we had all intension of using the Mapp Hill Roundabout to continue on our journey toward Sheraton, but this was not to be a peaceful decision.
Some low rate householder decked in a red dress and a pair of white flowered panties left her veranda and came down to our car and started to tear off the DLP stickers, ripped them to threads and threw them into our car. How did I get to know the panties she was wearing? She lifted her dress into the air and showed off herself.
She was then joined by a number of BLP supporters who had stopped a few feet in front our car leaving all four car doors open and joined the bombastic woman in her verbal abuse of my family.
I was not surprised that those offended by our presents were women. I must mention however, that one male happened to approach the car after we proceed away from them and parked on the side of the road to replace our damaged posters.
Forgetting I had my husband’s camera we were only able to capture the women in the background behind us attempting to throw stones at the car.
Frankly I do not see the scene of the whole fiasco. My seven year old son and my fifteen year old daughter were advised by one of the BLP party supporters not to be idiots like them – their parents.
Who are the idiots here? The lady at the rare of the motorcade who wanted us to pass some fifteen or so vehicles in breech of the law for overtaking. (2) The woman who was not even apart of the motorcade exposing herself in the road and in front of minors a (3) cursing and carrying on like there was no tomorrow or (4) the lone man who proceeded to follow the car on foot leaving the Hire car with its doors wide opened partly in the middle of a road beyond the major stop.
Is this still a Democratic country where one can have freedom of movement to reach one’s destination?
In an election which has been as hotly contested as this one there is a lot at stake. In a way it is God’s Blessings that this election will have a short campaign. Not withstanding the indicators are present that the political landscape of Barbados is starting to change face. Maybe it is not too late to arrest the slide.
Empathy and lies do not match. I read the above article and I can see a poorly concoct story that have no merit. The lady stated she travel to the Map Hill round-about, which I presume is the Bussa round-about. If she proceeded uphill towards the CBC. The majority of houses back the highway, and it will be impossible for someone to go to a car to pull off stickers. This whole episode depicts a failed attempt to create problems with our electioneering process. If this was true, she would have the exact location – house, colour, left or right side location and real facts.
Regrettable we have had to can some comments which in our judgment was leading BU down a path to lalaland.
…………………………………………………………………….
I don’t know what you trying to portray of holding back my comments. Comments by WIV, and some commenters, not only borders libel, but goes far past what is construed as downright libel and an insult to public officials that will degrade our island. Ever article I post, I do endless research before any posting. My information comes from actual statements and not from what commenters say. As you know, commenters usually makes wild statements that people refuse to challenge.
You are so full of a load of crap you are, take your licks like a man and shut up with your constant crying.
Let us state for the record that we have never deleted any comments posted by Frankology.
You are so full of a load of crap you are, take your licks like a man and shut up with your constant crying
…………………………………………………………………….
I always take my licks like man. Do you?
Let us state for the record that we have never deleted any comments posted by Frankology.
……………………………………………………………………..
Thanks BU for being the fairer blog. We all have our partisan views, but we must act professionally whilst carrying out our mandate.
This is hope for all our voters on Tuesday. It’s your democratic right to vote for the party you see fit to govern this country. In so doing, you must vote for the candidate within your constituency in order for the party of your choice to win. Another thing, you might vote for a particular party, or you might vote for an individual that in your observation, would make a better representative, here again, that is your right.
So whoever you vote for, do it for yourself, do not be intimidated by people, but it must be your conscious that will motivate you.
I will be voting for a chance for change, or a change for chance. I will do my thing on Tuesday and may the better party win. Regardless of the outcome, we still have to eat and sleep in this land call Barbados.
Frankology we do not appreciate the comment about BFP. In fact we go further ans attribute a big part of our decision to start this blog because we bought in to what BFP was/is doing. You don’t have to agree with BFP but you must agree that their emergence has started a new way news in Barbados is and will be handled in the future.
David, I had no alternative but to air my objections of how BFP handles commenters. From the time BFP stated who it will be voting for, I submitted over 15 submissions and onlt three reach the blog. All the others were either deleted or still on moderation. This is not ‘Free democracy”. Ask Marcus or Cliverton why my posts are still on moderation, and please do not blame ‘spam’ for the refusal.
Frankology, frankology,frankology, I thought you were not going to vote. You don’t seem to know sometimes if you sitting or standing. Ever thought about getting your own blog?
David I agree with you. Barbados’ landscape has changed and obviously it is not for the better. I shudder to think what may happen in the next Gen Elec.
I also shudder to think what is going to happen when people realise that they have only themselves to rely on and everything done gone. I cannot see it being pretty.
Barbados has entered another phase of its development or life. It is not looking good. Hooray for the economy according to some but I see bare stress for the people. Lost and not even aware.
Well, we will live until we die I suppose.
My take on it is different. Whoever wins it has to be a beginning and a mandate to do the right thing. If we now can view understand that there is widespread corruption it is up to Barbadians to work with every sinew they have to stop it, to correct it, and to redirect a course that we can be proud of.
By taking the high road yes, we live until we die. By taking the low road we are already dead.
#
Prof. Wren, Please kindly allow me to tell you that you are born a Hindu, that is why there are missionaries converting others to Hinduism. However, I have attended the Radhna Krishna Mandir in my country Guyana. Yiu also claim that Dr, Jagan’s book, and I gather it’s The West on Trial is one sided, well, may I kindly suggest that you read PM Burnham’s book A Destiny to Mould and you will see the other half. Now I have heard the late American newscaster Mr. Ed Bradley say that Guyana has a wonderful tension to it and the he really enjoyed touching down on BWIA now Caribbean Airlines at GEO and then heading into GT to have some roti and curry. So I don’t know what Dr. Gibson talking about. Oh gosh MASH is coming up and it is celebrated on the birth date of the first PM of a free and fair Guyana, His Excellency Prime Minister Forbes Burnham, and then of course President Jagdeo’s birthday is a few days later. YEAH Oh we welcome everyone to Guyana for MASH, CARIFESTA and in Cayenne GUYAFESTA. GUYANA an equal place under the sun, Come to Guyana and see for yourself. Those Guyanese that are coming to Barbados are really Barbadian, including the East Indians ones, you know they are dougla, but since you all know nothing about racial types you classify them as East Indians, they coming home. I don’t have any Barbadian in me so I have no desire to come to BGI. I don’t even stop there anymore on Caribbean Airways, I going nonstop to POS and on to GEO.
#
Sister Baby // February 1, 2008 at 1:08 am (edit)
Prof. I meant to say NO MISSIONARIES
#
Sister Baby // February 1, 2008 at 1:13 am (edit)
Yes we have oil in our country, and if that Fineman who is now Devilman to me had any sense he would have waited for the rig to come form Trinidad to dill for oil and then try to get a job on the rig, but no he goes and kills people in their sleep. That is a sin and I as a sometime Hindu knows that he will come back as a rat and we set a trap for him and that will be the end of him.
#
Sister Baby // February 1, 2008 at 2:09 am (edit)
I was born in Guyana of Guyanese parents of course in those days it was British Guiana and the then Governor was Sir Patrick Renison. I have no Barbadian blood in me, but I am a Hindu, Obeah, Methodist, Seventh Day Adventist, Church of God In Christ and Anglican. My favourite foods are curry and roti, anything curried, except goats, lanb, pork and beef. I love prawn curry and a nice aloo roti. Analysis, you are Guyanese whether you have Barbadian parents or English parents, you are Guyanese. And this nonsense of about there will be no Guyana is utter rubbish. You don’t understand the dynamics of our country and that is why you can say NO Guyana, which is foolish thingking, it is more like NO BARBADOS, as global warming is coming and will swallow up Barbados. And as Our lovely Minister of Social Affairs was saying to Lusignan residents ayo bettah behave ayo selves as ayo gun get hurt, the same applies to you all, behave yourselves as it is to this pressure cooker ayuh coming tuh in the next 50 years when there is NO MORE BARBADOS. Yes ayuh coming home soon, and as Granny Wilson use to say the world is circular and what goes around comes around. There you go. Oh I saw that Dr. Esther Sookoo in the papers today, and I can tell that giel is one smart girl. Dr. Sookoo come home to Guyana and practice your medical profession at the New Georgetown Public Hospital. Rihanna, lovely ad about me, except I can’t drink milk straight down, I have to add milo and ovaltine, so now you got to get into those ads. love you and hope you come to Carifesta. To the residents of Lusignan, ECD, The lOrd told methis morning that Fineman the man who carried out the killings has cancer of the brains and will die soon even if he is not caught by GDF
Sister Baby
Dr. Wren, You are wondering which university Dr. Gibson graduated from, well dear Dr. Wren, Dr. Gibson certainly did not graduate from the University of Guyana at Turkeyen, I had to say Turkeyen, because there is the University of Guyana at Tain in Berbice, UGB. Had Dr. Gibson obtain her degree from UG the book title would have had to change to Racial Tensions in the United States, East Indians would become white people, Afro Guyanese, African Americans, Stabroek News, the New York Times, Dr. Clive Thomas would be Dr. Alvin Pouissant, and President Jagdeo would be President Bush. With those changes the UG Board of Examinations would have said to her Great Wrtiring Skills Dr. Gibson, and with that we confer you with your degree of Doctorate in Literature.
It was interesting reading the composition of the N.C.F board and notice there is no place for a qualified musician.I am making this statement because over the years the music department was staff by persons who had or have very little knowledge in music education.Some of these same people are working with young children at the primary school level.
Music is considered not merely a skill to be mastered, but more deeply as an expression of the feelings, values and convivtions found throughout humanity.It is my feeling that the study, performance and creation of music can lead to an awareness of one’s own values.As in many other parts of the developed world we need to expose our kids to various aspects of music history, theory and performance with the intent of fostering a life long understanding of music,thereby influecing their careers.
Over to you Hon. Minister.
Overlook you are making a telling point. Remember all the confusion at Crop Over about judges etc? Remember that Crop Over is a significant even on the national callender? Music is a big part of the festival and our culture. Your observation is bang on Sir.
Concern Bajan, I think we should lobby for some change at the N.C.F. There are too many consultants and not professionals in the various disciplines at that institution. I have attended meetings and workshops and observed very few members making presentations in their special areas and in the case of music none.
I’m very concerned about the music programe or lack of done by the N.C.F. We know that Culture is nothing static and can also be referred to as patterns of human activity and symbolic structures that gives such activities significance and importance.
One of the first discipline you will find in culture is music, so if the Foundation is going to take it into the schools it should be a well structured programe taught by qualified and competent musicians.
Our children deserve better.
We agree with you Outlook. There is a new government let us hope that it brings the promised change. We wonder why people like Boo Rudder and Elombe and others have not been invited back to work with the NCF full time.
The new St. John Polyclinic will be completed as a matter of priority and other capital investments, both private and public, in the health care sector will be undertaken to ensure the restoration of Barbados place as a number one community health care provider, he noted.
==============================
I read the above nonsense in today’s advocate, and wonder why one would follow such an idea. Any clinic to serve the interests of the St John folk is best sited below Salters intersection where Highways X and 4 meet. By placing the clinic at this location we enlarge its catchment area, because the catchment area for such a clinic will then be most of St George, most of St John, sections of northern St Philip and an area in the central easterly section of St Michael.
We need to stop thinking parochially and in terms of constituences, and think in terms of regions served by available public transport. To place a clinic in St John where the abandoned clinic is sited is out of the way for most St John residents using the current bus system.
Currently there is a badly sited clinic at the Glebe and there was one at Gall Hill. Both of these satellite clinics Satellite clinics at these sites were established in the fifties by the late Prof Standard. But now these clinics should be amalgamated and cited below Salters intersection where Highways X and 4 meet, and where they really belong. Such a move facilitates attendance by those who depend on the public transport services.
area in the central easterly section of St Michael.
Relocation of these clinics will also free up the building at the Glebe, and the abandoned building in St John for use as a center for educational, social and other activities (police station, courts etc, library post poffice, as at Holetown .
By placing the Zone four Polyclinic/Emergency Center below below Salters intersection where Highways X and 4 meet, we enlarge its catchment area, and get more bang for our buck! We also free up the building at the Glebe, and the abandoned building in St John for use as a center for educational, social and other activities.
Finally the clinic does not have to be a sprawling monstrosity as some of those currently existing, in which there is a lot of unused space.
As an individual who works in the Social Serice sector in North America, it is sad to read about Mr. Stephen Grant’s diagnosos and the ongoing problems he has faced his entire life.
Are Barbadians so preoccupied with wealth that they refuse to address social issues such as Mr. Grants health and housing issues. It is sad when a Welfare worker refuse to accomodate him in their office and nothing is done about their attitude towards this man. I am sure there are great bajans out there who are willing to advocate on his behalf. His support plan is simple, health care and housing. This man is not on any form of drugs or does not have any mental health issues that is being mentioned. Come on let Mr. Grant spend the latter half of his life in dignity.
One day while vacationing abroad take a trip to our shelters here and then you will be thankful for the minor cases you have there. Barbadians are suppose to be God fearing people where is that fear and compassion when addressing the serious needs of your own people.
Media Freedom and Political Debate in the Digital Era
Jacob Rowbottom**King’s College, Cambridgea*King’s College, Cambridge
aKing’s College, Cambridge. With thanks to Michael Birnhack, the participants of the Cambridge University Public Law Discussion Group and the anonymous referees for comments on earlier drafts.
Go to sectionTop of pageAbstractMEDIA FREEDOM AND MODELS OF ME…HOPES AND FEARS FOR ONLINE EXP…SELF-EXPRESSION AND PARTICIPAT…MEDIA ELITES AND ONLINE EXPRES…MEDIA REGULATION AND DEMOCRATI…CONCLUSION
Abstract
This article examines the impact of online expression on theories of media freedom. While media freedom has generally been justified instrumentally, the opportunities for expression via the Internet may require greater emphasis on the interests of the individual speaker. Despite this development, this article shows how a small number of speakers will still command a much wider audience and have greater influence over political debate. For such speakers the approach to media freedom devised in the mass media era will remain applicable.
Since its inception, the new media has been predicted to revolutionise political communications.1 While it is still early days and the technology continues to develop, many predictions have been partially realised. In the 2004 US elections, the weblog (blog), which allows individuals to keep a log of their comments and views online and to update them regularly, was the most talked about development. The blogs produced by individual citizens were seen to act as a watchdog on both politicians and the established media. While this was the big story of 2004, there is no reason to assume the blog will be the dominant format in the future. Already there is talk of podcasting and videoblogging superseding the text-based blog. The new technology is said to be breaking down the barrier between citizen and journalist. An indication of this process was apparent in the wake of the July 2005 bombings in London. Pictures of the immediate aftermath and videos of police raids taken with mobile phones helped to tell the story to the rest of the world. Developments in technology are not restricted to individuals; the established media are also adapting their services. The BBC, for example, already makes a number of its television programmes available for viewing online and many media providers are looking for ways to allow the audience to interact with and comment upon their content. A number of established media entities are buying up companies associated with new media, for example BSkyB has acquired the broadband supplier Easynet;2 ITV has bought Friends Reunited and News Corp has bought the owners of http://www.myspace.com, Intermix.3 Such moves reflect the established media’s goal to increase their use of digital technologies to distribute content.
These developments raise the question of whether online content should be subject to the same regulations as other types of media or be relatively free of any restraints. If a website features political advocacy in an election campaign, should it carry the name and address of the publisher as is required for printed posters supporting candidates?4 Should some online content providers be subject to right of reply laws or a duty to cover certain types of content? A heavy-handed approach to regulation may discourage innovation by individual users, as seen in the blogs and many individual websites. However, a hands-off approach carries the danger of undermining the public duties of the media and allowing political debate to become skewed. Such issues are heightened if online technologies become the dominant mode of political communication.
This article does not seek to answer these specific questions, but will address two preliminary issues. First, whether the normative approach to dealing with media freedom should be modified in the light of these changes and place greater emphasis on the individual speaker. The second issue is whether these changes lead to a new paradigm in which regulations to promote the public service element of media activity are inappropriate. In addressing these issues, this article will consider arguments that online expression requires a different approach from that accorded to the traditional mass media. The main grounds for a new approach are premised upon the low cost of communications; the relative ease of participation; the greater emphasis on user control and consequent demise of mediators and controlling elites. While accepting the many beneficial changes brought about through online communications, this article will argue that rather than generating a level playing field, online expression can not only perpetuate existing media elites, but also create new ones. Consequently, online expression operates at different tiers, as found in the offline world. The regulatory approach may therefore require different methods depending on the tier of expression.
In making this argument, the article will be divided into five sections. The first will look at the traditional approaches to regulating the mass media and the relationship between expression rights and media freedom. The second section will examine some of the academic responses to the Internet and its impact on the media and freedom of expression. The third section will consider the increased opportunities for individual participation on the Internet, which differentiate it from traditional forms of mass media. The fourth section will then show how certain media organisations/speakers maintain an elite status online that gives disproportionate influence over public debate. Finally, possible strategies of regulation and the various pitfalls will be outlined. While this raises a range of important issues for different categories of expression, the central focus of this article will be the coverage of politics and political debate, an issue that lies at the heart of the democratic and public service functions of the media.
Underlying this argument is a view that the regulation of the media and the protection of its freedom must be understood in the context of how people communicate. A system designed with pamphleteers in mind would surely be inappropriate in an age where television is the dominant form of mass communication. Similarly it is necessary to ask whether the development of online expression, such as the Internet, changes why and how we should protect media freedom.5 This is not to adopt a position of technological determinism. Law does not take a secondary role; it takes an active role in shaping how the technology develops and how it will be used. The current media practices are in part a product and reflection of the regulatory environment. However, the regulatory environment may need to be adapted to respond to these practices. Such changes in the regulation may help ensure that the technology and its use continue to develop in ways that reflect democratic and public service values.
Go to sectionTop of pageAbstractMEDIA FREEDOM AND MODELS OF ME…HOPES AND FEARS FOR ONLINE EXP…SELF-EXPRESSION AND PARTICIPAT…MEDIA ELITES AND ONLINE EXPRES…MEDIA REGULATION AND DEMOCRATI…CONCLUSION
MEDIA FREEDOM AND MODELS OF MEDIA REGULATION
The model of media regulation must be considered in light of rights of expression and media freedom. The relationship between the right of expression and media freedom is complex.6 Starting with freedom of expression, three well-known justifications are often advanced.7 The first view is that freedom of expression is essential to a person’s autonomy and self-fulfilment. The second is the marketplace of ideas, that minimal government regulation will allow robust debate between citizens that is most likely to lead to the truth. The third justification is that freedom of expression is a necessary component of democratic government. There is an overlap between these justifications and all have been subject to extensive criticisms.8 Instrumental justifications are often invoked to support media freedom, for example as providing a public function in disseminating information, viewpoints and ideas.9 As Lord Bingham explained in McCartan Turkington Breen v Times Newspapers:
the majority cannot participate in the public life of their society … if they are not alerted to and informed about matters which call or may call for consideration and action. It is very largely through the media … that they will be so alerted and informed. The proper functioning of modern participatory democracy requires that the media be free, active, professional and enquiring.10
It is harder to maintain that media freedom is valuable because it contributes to the self-fulfilment of the speaker. Only a limited number of people can air their views on television or write their own newspaper column. A barrier exists between the journalist or reporter, and the audience. Even if speakers are granted access to the mass media, this right can only be engaged by a small number of groups or individuals.11 The value of media freedom comes from the way it serves the interests of the public and audience.12
That media freedom is instrumentally justified tells us little about how this freedom is best protected. For example, in the US Justice Stewart argued for the autonomy of select media institutions, distinct from other speech rights, to secure independence from the government.13 This has not been the approach adopted by the courts in the US, under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) or in UK law. A contrasting view is reflected in Sir John Donaldson’s statement that the media’s ‘right to know and their right to publish is neither more nor less than that of the general public’.14 However, equating media freedom with that of individual speakers is not always helpful given that the way the media exercise their freedom will be different from that of individual speakers, given the scale and influence of their operations. Furthermore, the two freedoms may conflict. Those controlling the mass media may use their freedom to undermine the expression rights of others, for example excluding particular points of view. While the same point may be made about other institutions that control forums for expression,15 the point is particularly pressing for the media given its reach and influence over public debate. Consequently, Professor Judith Litchenberg writes:
Unlike freedom of speech, to which certain aspects of which our commitment must be virtually unconditional, freedom of the press should be contingent on the degree to which it promotes certain values at the core of our interest in freedom of expression generally.16
This approach can be seen in the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence under Article 10 where special protection is granted to the media when performing its ‘public watchdog’ role ‘to impart information and ideas of public interest’.17 This protection is granted to the media not as an institution, but rather to the product of the speaker and its capacity to serve debate on matters in the public interest.
The view that media freedom should be protected in so far as it serves that value of freedom of expression helps to explain why some regulations of media activities are consistent with Article 10.18 The point should not be overstated, as the ECtHR’s support for media regulation is limited to merely finding it consistent with Article 10 as a necessary limit on the media expression, rather than finding it to be a necessary component of expression rights. Craufurd Smith argues that the regulation of the media need not be seen in this way as a necessary limitation of expression rights, but can be seen as a way of promoting the conditions for free expression.19 Even though the ECtHR has not gone this far, the recognition that some regulation is necessary in a democratic society is still important, as if media freedom is an unqualified guarantee against state interference, then the media may simply become an outlet for a self-interested point of view, such as the views of the owners of private media. Such a scenario raises the danger that media freedom will be asserted simply to protect the economic interests of the media company or other property owner, rather than to serve democratic goals or the public interest.20 The mass media, with the high costs of access and control in the hands of an elite, requires some oversight to prevent its important social and democratic functions being skewed in the interests of a small number of speakers or gatekeepers.
None of this is to say that all regulation of the media is justified, it must be shown that the regulation will serve democratic needs. What type of media regime best serves these needs depends on the model of democracy to be applied.21 While consideration of the various different models is beyond the scope of this paper, most models of democracy will require some level of news coverage, the presentation of information and analysis, and the provision of diverse viewpoints. Different regimes of regulation have traditionally applied to different types of media. The print media is subject to public interest regulation governing ownership and to those regulations applying to all types of expression, but is not subject to content regulations seeking to promote pluralism, for example it is under no duty of balance or fairness in political coverage. By contrast, the broadcast media in the UK are subject to stricter regulations. All licensed broadcasters are subject to a basic tier of regulation imposing requirements of accuracy and impartiality, and taste and decency.22 Advertisements on the broadcast media are subject to controls on timing and content, and no political advertisements are permitted on television or radio. Those designated as public service broadcasters are subject to extra tiers of regulation, for example requiring a certain level of educational and cultural programmes to be broadcast. The distinction is reflected in the Article 10 jurisprudence that permits more intensive regulations on the broadcast media.23 Why the distinct regulatory regimes have developed has been the subject of much debate,24 and the difference is presented as social and historical rather than theoretical.25 Consequently, many of the regulations applied to the broadcast media may justifiably be imposed on the press, and vice versa, if it serves democratic needs such as pluralism and diversity.
The precise model of regulation appropriate for online expression is still being worked out.26 It has been argued that online expression should fit the print model,27 or is at least closer to that model, rather than the broadcast regulatory regime.28 The White Paper that formed the basis of the UK Communications Act explained that Internet material should be subject to regulation a tier below the most relaxed standards applied to broadcasters.29 Online content is exempt from the regulations applied to broadcasters30 and is subject to general regulations imposed on expression, such as public order laws, defamation, confidentiality and intellectual property. However, the European Commission has proposed extending the Television Without Frontiers Directive to some types of audio-visual content distributed online, suggesting that some online content is similar to the broadcast media.31 Many of the services provided online have qualities analogous to either type of media. For example, more news providers ranging from the BBC to The Sun provide text based and video services on their websites. While online expression has been subject to less regulation than other types of established media, this position needs to be reassessed as more of its services move closer to the current output of broadcasters.
A further point to be noted at the outset is that the level of invasiveness is sometimes used to differentiate types of media. The broadcast media is seen to push its content onto the audience without request. By contrast, other types of media, such as newspapers, require active steps by the audience to receive content, the user pulls the material from the source. The extent to which this distinction accurately describes the different types of media has been questioned, as it may exaggerate the passivity associated with television. The television viewer still can choose whether he or she wants to watch the television and what channel he or she wishes to view.32 This level of control increases as more channels become available. Viewers of television are not only getting more choice in the numbers of programmes to watch, but also greater choice when to watch. For example, digital video recorders such as TiVo allow individuals to view programmes at their chosen time, filter advertisements and rewind live TV while watching. Many TV programmes also offer greater interactivity through participation in the form of SMS voting and the selection of additional content using the ‘red button’ on digital formats. The level of control given to the audience in the pull media can also be exaggerated given that a newspaper reader may be able to select a particular title, but beyond that cannot determine which issues are to be covered and in what depth. While the role of the audience varies according to the type of media, it is important not to exaggerate these differences.
Where the online media fits in this framework has been the subject of debate, and will vary according to the application.33 In ACLU v Reno, Justice Stevens argued that ‘the Internet is not as “invasive” as radio or television’, given that it does not appear on a computer screen unbidden and that users are unlikely to encounter content online by accident.34 Under this view, receiving content from an Internet webpage requires active steps in which an individual seeks out the particular source by either typing in a URL or choosing a particular link. While the digital media does provide greater opportunities for audience control and participation, this article will consider the limits to this argument. When an individual uses a search engine, he or she will not always be looking for a specific source or item of information, but is hoping to be told which sources will be most helpful or relevant. When a link is selected, it will normally be due to another source recommending that particular webpage. Furthermore, many users will simply return to the same sources or sites for particular types of content, or subscribe to direct feeds from that source. While the technology permits much greater participation for users, the social habits that shape the use of this media and the need for some guidance in navigating the mass of information will enable some online speakers to be able to push some of their content to a wide audience.
To summarise, many of the criticisms of the media lie in the fact that control lies in the hands of a few, whether this is through a state appointed broadcaster or through economic power in the private media. Consequently, media freedom cannot be equated with other forms of individual expression given that only a small group of people or institutions will be able to exercise media freedom. One goal of regulating the media is to ensure that media institutions perform their important social functions and exercise their power in conformity with their democratic and social responsibilities.35 Whether this concern applies to online expression is the question addressed in the remainder of this article.
Go to sectionTop of pageAbstractMEDIA FREEDOM AND MODELS OF ME…HOPES AND FEARS FOR ONLINE EXP…SELF-EXPRESSION AND PARTICIPAT…MEDIA ELITES AND ONLINE EXPRES…MEDIA REGULATION AND DEMOCRATI…CONCLUSION
HOPES AND FEARS FOR ONLINE EXPRESSION AND MEDIA FREEDOM
In the early days of the Internet it was hoped that the new media would remove many of the barriers that have traditionally excluded groups from public debate. In an optimistic vision, Professor Eugene Volokh argued in 1995 that online expression would promote ‘cheap speech’ which, while not eliminating inequalities, would transfer much power to users and speakers:
the new technologies will make it much easier for all ideas, whether backed by the rich or poor, to participate in the marketplace. Even if many individuals still can’t afford to counterspeak effectively, there’ll be many more organizations able to speak out on all sides of an issue.36
The implication being that online speakers do not require regulation to ensure coverage of particular points of view or types of content. If there is demand for such coverage, there is nothing to stand in the way of its provision. Many of the economic barriers imposed on expression have been reduced, thereby alleviating some of the major complaints against the media. Furthermore, under this view the opportunities for private censorship are also reduced.37 The marketplace of ideas is seen to function more fairly. While such optimism seems characteristic of the early response to the Internet, such sentiments have been revived with recent popular uses such as blogging.38
At the other end of the spectrum, Professor Cass Sunstein, in http://www.Republic.com, argues that while the Internet may help make expression less expensive and unmediated, it allows users to select information that conforms to their pre-existing views and to exclude opposing arguments through filtering technology.39 In other words, the user can now, or will be able to, use the media to avoid being confronted with opposing points of view. The lack of an intermediary and decentralised nature of the Internet means that citizens will no longer share the same agenda, and people can retreat into their own virtual worlds. Given Sunstein’s model of civic republicanism and deliberative democracy, he is concerned that individuals will use new media to satisfy their private preferences rather than in the service of civic duty. The point highlighted by Sunstein is distinct from the issue in this paper, in that he is concerned with the disappearance of intermediaries that help facilitate shared experience and promote deliberation. However, it is important in that he does not believe unregulated online expression will serve the need for democratic debate.
Sunstein proposes a series of reforms that attempt to apply principles similar to the broadcast model to online expression, such as creating websites dedicated to public discourse, disclosure of the resources allocated to public interest issues by media companies, subsidies to sites promoting public discussion, and finally he proposes a scheme whereby conflicting viewpoints can access particular sites, by imposing must carry rules, link or hyperlink requirements. Supporting these measures, Sunstein deploys the arguments used in his earlier work on freedom of expression,40 drawing analogies with the public forum41 and pointing to the central role of state regulation in creating the Internet and protecting its commercial uses, for example by protecting the rights of those who register domain names.42 As the regulation of digital speech is therefore unavoidable, the question moves from whether or not to regulate to become a question of what type of regulation will promote our collective goals. Sunstein’s work is concerned with promoting the deliberative ideals that he believes underlie the protection of free speech guaranteed in the US Constitution. Sunstein believes that placing too much control in the hands of users may undermine the exchange and deliberation of ideas that is necessary in a democracy.
Sunstein’s approach has been met with a number of criticisms. Firstly, those who were critical of his earlier work and reject his arguments in relation to the broadcast media will reject the arguments set out in http://www.Republic.com. Those who are generally sceptical of government intervention and believe that individuals should be trusted to make their own choices are no more likely to accept the regulation of online expression. A second set of objections is that there is something distinctive about online expression that makes the regulations inappropriate. Professor Dan Hunter argues that there is no need for state subsidies to promote deliberative websites as such websites are being established in any event.43 Regulating for diversity is also misguided as being extremely wealthy is not a pre-requisite for the setting up of a website. The Internet already covers a great deal of diverse information, allowing the democratic need for pluralism to be served without such onerous regulation. Furthermore, it is doubted whether the level of user selection envisaged by Sunstein will be technologically possible, and if it were then the proposed regulations would be easily evaded. This line of argument is that if these regulations were appropriate in an age of the mass media, online expression need not invoke the same concern. This approach does not depart from justification for media freedom outlined above, but rather suggests that such regulations are unnecessary to create a democratic media.
Professor Jack Balkin’s approach to online expression has elements of both lines of criticism.44 He has criticised the policies advocated by Sunstein in relation to the broadcast media on the grounds they put too little weight on popular choices.45 Balkin’s argument also falls into the second school of thought that online expression is fundamentally distinct from other types of communication. He argues that the salient features of online expression undermine the theory of expression on which civic republican and deliberative models are based. In particular, he argues that theories of expression closely associated by civic republicanism have become limited and were devised in response to the specific issues raised by mass media:
the paradigm case that motivates the progressivist agenda – the case of few speakers broadcasting to a largely inactive mass audience – no longer describes the world we live in.46
Whether the mass media audience were ever as passive as the statement suggests is questionable, but online expression offers more overt opportunities for interaction. Professor Balkin does not argue for deregulation of the media, but rather that participation should become a more central concern for this type of expression. Digital technologies facilitate greater participation in politics and culture, neither of which should be in the hands of an elite. Instead, people can participate in shaping culture in a way that was not possible before. It is therefore possible to emphasise freedom of expression from the point of view of the speaker without reinforcing the commercial interests of the media owner. Online expression is not just about the expression of a select number of individuals or institutions that control the media. Instead, the line between media freedom and individual expression becomes blurred, and greater emphasis on the interest of the speaker rather than the audience may be possible. The assumptions underlying the argument that there has been a paradigm shift will now be considered.
Go to sectionTop of pageAbstractMEDIA FREEDOM AND MODELS OF ME…HOPES AND FEARS FOR ONLINE EXP…SELF-EXPRESSION AND PARTICIPAT…MEDIA ELITES AND ONLINE EXPRES…MEDIA REGULATION AND DEMOCRATI…CONCLUSION
SELF-EXPRESSION AND PARTICIPATION ONLINE
As stated above, while traditional media freedom is hard to justify in terms of the interest of the speaker, there is less reason to overlook the needs of individual online speakers given the ease with which a person can create a blog, post a message or create a website. The shift from looking at expression from the point of view of the public or recipient to the point of view of speaker can be illustrated by various types of online expression, such as the blog. While the blog has been most prominent in the US, it has yet to have similar impact in the UK.47 The blog is nevertheless worth examining as it represents the closest thing to realising the democratised media sector predicted in the early days of the Internet.48 Even if blogs never take off in the same way in the UK, other forms of popular media are likely to share similar characteristics.
Blogs give people a chance to express themselves on any topic and update the content with new posts on a daily basis. Individuals can advance their own views directly to the outside world in a way that is unmediated and not reliant on others to represent their views. Given the vast volume of blogs and the frequency with which they are updated, only a small number can reach a potentially wide audience. As the majority do not attain this potential, they cannot be considered analogous to the established mass media. The value of the blog lies more in the benefit to the authors as an outlet for their views, or potentially to converse, or exchange thoughts with a small network of people.49 Writing in the mid twentieth century at a time when the mass media was becoming the dominant form of communication, Alexander Meiklejohn wrote:
What is essential is not that everyone shall speak, but that everything worth saying shall be said… the vital point, as stated negatively, is that no suggestion of policy shall be denied a hearing because it is on one side of the issue rather than another.50
The view of blog given above appears to turn Meiklejohn’s statement on its head. Given the varying quality and reliability of blog content, it matters not that every idea is heard, but that everyone has a chance to speak.
The approach given above moves away from expression serving the public interest and needs of the audience, to a form a self-presentation. As a Hansard Society report explained:
To blog is declare your presence; to disclose to the world that you exist and what its like to be you; to affirm that your thoughts are at least as worth hearing as anyone else’s; to emerge from the spectating audience as a player and maker of meanings.51
Freedom of expression in this context cannot be seen as a top down process, but as a two-way process of participation. The greater emphasis given to role of the speaker can be justified from both the self-fulfilment justification of protecting expression, or within the instrumental democratic role for the expression. Under the latter justification, the blog is seen to supplement the formal channels of representation. If a number of blogs create a collective buzz, it will signal to elected representatives and other institutions what issues are of greatest concern. Such involvement by the individual can be compared to the protest, where people assemble in prominent places or write letters to well known newspapers, to get a sense of engagement from the system and perhaps have a real impact, rather than state their opinions to a few friends. Like the protest, the influence can also come about through large numbers of people coordinating their activities.
In this way, online expression can be a place for associative activities. This may take place in traditional formats such as interest group websites. While there is little new about this given that such groups have always produced newsletters and other forms of media, it may allow the interest group to reach a wider audience and allow more groups to use a wider range of media, such as audio-visual content or online discussions. The associative activities can take place in less formal ways, for example through a collectively produced website, or through websites or bloggers providing links to sites they closely identify with and discuss one another’s content. Online expression may therefore warrant greater emphasis on individual and group participation, a modification of media freedom that can take place within the instrumental justifications for expression or through the self-fulfilment justification, and overlap with the protection of freedom of association.
The blog can change the way we think about media communication in other ways. The author can write from a private space, such as their home and often write about personal experiences, blurring the distinction between private and public expression.52 The ideas may be incomplete or undeveloped. Just as when people speak in a private setting where they are comfortable, the blogger may use the blog to test ideas and try out arguments, without feeling that they must be committed to the principles in the future. Such blurring contrasts with the way the traditional media content is produced to appeal to a wide audience. Online expression also allows speakers to mix personal experiences with public issues. It gives individuals greater creativity in expressing their views, by allowing content to be copied and modified. Such examples can be seen in the 2005 UK general election where some web sites allowed users to ‘remix’ election messages, for example changing the wording of election posters.53 As technology continues to make the use of sound files, video and graphics easier and less expensive, greater movement away from purely text-based services is likely to contribute to this trend. Already podcasting and video blogging enable users to regularly express themselves through sound and video files. The need to mix politics with entertainment may be necessary to reach the desired audience, especially as more and more sources compete for audience attention.
This section has illustrated how it is possible for individuals to participate in media activities as never before, not only in the ease of publishing their thoughts, but also broadening the scope of what can be done. Such a development modifies the thinking about media freedom to give greater emphasis on the perspective of the speaker, an emphasis that was not so central to traditional forms of mass communication. Such expression can also help create networks where influence arises through association. Consequently, such associative or small-scale expressive activity should not be subject to the type of public interest regulations found in the broadcast model. While this is an important development, it does not completely change the paradigm. As argued in the next section, a handful of speakers or mediators will have disproportionate impact on political debate. Consequently, the elite speaking to the mass audience is still a central feature of the media, for which existing regulatory models may be appropriate. Cheap speech online is important, just as inexpensive expressive activities such as marches or demonstrations are important in the offline world, but there should not be illusions that this creates a level playing field in expression.
Go to sectionTop of pageAbstractMEDIA FREEDOM AND MODELS OF ME…HOPES AND FEARS FOR ONLINE EXP…SELF-EXPRESSION AND PARTICIPAT…MEDIA ELITES AND ONLINE EXPRES…MEDIA REGULATION AND DEMOCRATI…CONCLUSION
MEDIA ELITES AND ONLINE EXPRESSION
The traditional model of public interest media regulation is both suspicious of elites and the central control of the media, yet dependent on them. If control of the media rests in the hands of the few, then the danger exists that it will be used to promote a small number of limited viewpoints, to allow the views of the owner to have disproportionate influence on public discussion or simply ignore public affairs altogether. Yet some form of central control facilitates public interest regulation by providing a clear target for its provisions. The addition of so many online speakers comes at the expense of this order and control that was a necessary part of the mass media model. However, in this section it will be argued that the dominance of media elites will not become a thing of the past and even with the relatively low costs of distribution, a small number of speakers, often with substantial economic resources behind them, will consistently command a mass audience. Consequently, there will be certain types of online speaker that are appropriate targets for mass media regulations.
The established media in the offline world will continue to have a strong influence over public debate. Statistics from the 2005 general election show that while the number of people seeking information about the election online is increasing, the traditional sources such as television and newspapers are dominant.54 While Internet use in political expression is more developed in the US, research from the Pew Center has shown a similar dominance of television as a source of political information.55 Consequently, the Internet supplements the traditional media and provides an alternative source of information, rather than replacing traditional outlets. Taking the media as a whole, a level playing field for participants is still not in sight, and those elites controlling the traditional media have much greater influence over political debate than online sources. However, this point suggests that at present online expression does not support arguments for deregulating other sectors, but says little about the regulatory regime that should apply online. Even if this situation changes and the Internet becomes the dominant source of media content, the existing media elites will nonetheless remain. With such a wide range of material available online, people have to be selective about what they read and also need to know where to find the best material. The established and trusted media sites provide a convenient point to receive accurate news, so people will continue to visit the familiar names.56 According to a Hansard Society report, the BBC was the most prevalent source of online political information in the 2005 UK general election, whereas candidates, lobby groups, blogs and tactical voting sites were ‘virtually ignored’.57
A similar point can be made in relation to blogs. While much has been made of the rise of blogs in democratising the media, a small number receive a very high number of hits each day as well as links from other blogs and websites. Five ‘star’ bloggers based in the US average over a hundred thousand hits per day, whereas the vast majority of blogs receive much less traffic or links.58 The reason for the ‘star’ blogger’s success may partly be due to the talents of its author, the content and the frequency with which it is updated. However, even if a blog does have quality content, it takes time for this to become established and known. One way to get to know which websites and online sources are most reliable is through references in trusted sources. Blogs may gain audiences through word of mouth and links from other blogs and websites. If a blog has a significant audience, more people will be able to tell their friends about it or link it to their own website. This can lead to a snowballing effect, where the most popular websites become even more popular as the interest in blogs grows. Once the name and reputation is secured, the advantages can be self-reinforcing.59 Consequently, getting the right links that can trigger a wider audience can be crucial to the blogger’s success.
As this trend develops, the ‘star’ blogger plays a gatekeeping role, deciding which other sites to link to their blog. Many bloggers would resent being referred to as gatekeepers and argue that they merely lend their support to bloggers or campaigns that already have built up their own following.60 Whatever basis on which the blogger chooses which views or stories to promote, and which campaigns to support, that choice made by the ‘star’ blogger will expose those views to a wide audience. The traditional media can have a similar effect, as providing coverage in the press or on television will bring the blog to a wider audience, as occurred with Salam Pax’s blogs from Baghdad.61 The offline media therefore acts as gatekeeper and helps to consolidate the ‘star’ blog or website. The high number of visitors that follow as a result of the publicity will help the blog gain more links and word of mouth visitors. The popularity of the site can bring about other advantages, for example, the revenues generated by advertising from a highly visited site may help the author(s) dedicate greater time and resources to it, which will help produce the content that maintains the higher audience. A small number of very popular blogs will therefore occupy a position quite distinct from the vast number of individual websites and blogs.
None of this is to express any conclusion about the fairness of this hierarchy in online expression. The influence and popularity of the successful blogger may be well deserved, but their value is no longer rooted in the self-fulfilment of the speaker outlined above. They serve a role that can help expose viewpoints to a wide audience and to influential opinion formers.62 Their expression has much greater opportunity to persuade people or influence politics than the expression of most other individuals. The ‘star’ blogger that reaches a wide audience begins to blur with some characteristics of the established media. While the blog may offer many opportunities for the audience to post comments, it is still the blogger that sets the agenda and decides which postings are most prominent. The ‘star’ blog or website, due to the wide audience cannot possibly respond to the messages and comments sent in by users, and starts to resemble the top down flow of information of the traditional media, rather than conversation referred to above.63 The point is not to undermine the important work and developments going on, or suggest such sites be subject to content regulation. Instead, the contribution of the small number of widely visited sites and blogs should be valued to the extent the needs of the mass audience and public are served, as is the case with the traditional mass media. The paradigm of the source speaking to a mass audience may not describe blogging completely, but is still applicable to some elements of online expression.
In addition to this, a new range of gatekeepers exists, whether through search engines, such as Google or services that aggregate blogs, such as Technorati. If the searcher is looking for a very specific piece of information, such as a particular posting by a specific author, the engine merely provides the user with what they are seeking. The user will already have knowledge of the content from some other source and formed his or her preference. However, where the user’s search is more generic, the engine will return a larger number of results, which requires some method of prioritisation. In these circumstances users may not know precisely what they want, and the value placed by the user on the content may be dependent on the level of priority given to it by the search engine.64 The success of an online speaker in reaching a wide audience will depend on if and where these facilities list the site, which in turn depends on method the search engine uses to aggregate the information.65
If the search engine operates a business model of aggregation, then priority of place may be given to those who pay, rather than those with quality or reliable content. However, some sites place the sponsored results in a separate category to make this clear to the user. According to information on their own website, Google rank pages according to relevance and reliability.66 The ranking system looks not only at the page content and how many links a page receives from other sites, but also the importance of the sites providing the link. While such an approach limits the possibility of editorial judgement on the part of Google, it could replicate the inequalities discussed above in relation to blogs.67 Sites that have many links or have links from influential sites are already more likely to gain a wider audience, and are also more likely to rank highly in a Google search. This perpetuates the high readership and increases the chances of gaining more links from other sites.68 It may be that this system is more likely to give the reader what they want and preferable to the alternatives, but nevertheless does impact on the chances of gaining a wider readership. Similar points can be made about other methods of distribution such as RSS69 and the types of aggregation that are being developed for the next generation of search engines, for example looking at the previous choices of the user.70 The user will have a fixed preference of content or source, or the aggregator has to make some choice of what material is most relevant or important.
Some of the new gatekeepers also provide access to news sources on their sites, so the user can view the latest headlines. At present, Google, for example, ranks news items according to the relevance of the text and places the most recent articles first. However, Google are reportedly seeking to rank news postings not just according to topicality but also based on reliability and accuracy of the news source.71 How the reliability and accuracy of the news source is determined under the proposed system of prioritisation is a key question, and will be based on a combination of factors including the amount of content produced by the source, the traffic attracted by that source, the number of staff employed and global operations of the source.72 Emphasising these factors is likely to reinforce the position of the large established media companies that can afford to employ a large number of people globally and update content frequently. Consequently, the views that will be most prominent and reach the widest possible audience will still be those selected by a small set of dominant media organisations. This may give the user what they want and distribute the best quality content, but again it shows that the paradigm of the mass media is not outdated. Users may have more control, but a small number of content providers will have the dominant voices in public discourse.
There will always be ways around the gatekeeper’s choices. If the website itself is newsworthy it will be hard to keep the online speaker out. This may occur when the website or blog has some scoop or breaks a story the other sources miss, or features some technological innovation. However, this will only improve the traffic to those sites in the short-term while that story is of interest. To maintain the audience, it will need an established name or continuous routing through the gatekeepers mentioned above. As there are more and more websites and blogs appearing the need for the gatekeeper will increase. Given the global nature of the Internet, it is likely the elite or gatekeepers will become more powerful. In the mass media era, the elites generally operated at a national level, whereas companies such as Microsoft, Google and Yahoo perform this task internationally. While it may be argued that the competition between search engines ensures that users will always have alternatives, a small number of search engines are likely to remain dominant. First, the users often lack the information to assess the performance of the particular search engine and the basis of its listings.73 The user is more likely to stick with the convenience of their known and established search engine, with whom they may already have links, such as an email account. Secondly, the established names will use their resources to ensure their product maintains its popularity, by investing their funds into development, buying up smaller more innovative search engines,74 or adding new services to their sites.75
Despite the high hopes for the new media, it is important not to overstate its potential impact. Even those most enthusiastic about online expression do not suggest blogs and individual sites will topple the established media’s power in shaping political discussion. The reason why the playing field of online speech is not level is much the same as for other forms of media. Even if licensing were not an issue, most people could not start a TV station. Although online expression cuts the costs of printing and distribution of the traditional media, there are still other substantial costs. To produce original high quality content still requires either the employment of a wide number of reporters and journalists, or the purchase of content elsewhere.76 Furthermore the nature of online speech may work to increase costs. As there is an expectation that online news sources will always be up to date, the services of reporters, writers and external news providers are required more frequently. Improvements in the technology increase audience expectations of content, for example for more news sites to provide video clips. This and other future developments may make the cost of online content similar to that of the broadcast media.77 If this is the case, economies of scale could lead to established media and elite online content providers becoming more dominant in the market.
While the small websites may not compete with the established media outlets directly, they do have a significant impact on the media and political communications. For example, the blog may act as a source for the established media, sometimes due to the expertise of the writer or due to the proximity of the blogger to the events.78 The online media also provides content that is not available elsewhere, as happens when journalists put unpublished stories on the Internet. A famous example is the reporting of US Senator Trent Lott’s remarks at Senator Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday online, which were interpreted as expressing support for Thurmond’s earlier segregationist policies and led to Lott’s resignation. While the established media initially reported his remarks sporadically, a number of influential blogs gave the story sustained coverage, which eventually forced the story to become a major headline. While it is debatable exactly how much credit should lie with the blogs and the established media for this episode, it does suggest that some bloggers can make it harder for a story to be suppressed.79 Similarly, the work of online reporters and bloggers brought to public attention evidence of the US forces’ use of white phosphorous in Fallujah, which had not been reported by other media outlets.80 A further function is for the online speakers to check the content of the established media. An example of this occurred in the 2004 US elections when claims that President Bush received preferential treatment while serving in the Texas Air National Guard were broadcast on the CBS programme 60 Minutes. Immediately after the broadcast, the authenticity of the documents supporting the allegations was questioned in a number of blogs, and then followed by coverage in the mainstream media. The controversy led to CBS anchor Dan Rather’s early retirement and the resignation of four CBS employees. The episode has been cited as illustrating the role of online speakers providing not just an additional check on government power, but a check on the media itself, forming a ‘fifth estate’.
As with the Trent Lott incident, the CBS episode shows how the blogs worked in tandem with the established media. Furthermore, it was not just a single influential blog that made the story, but a number of bloggers that created a ‘buzz’ that helped to feed the story. According to research by the Pew Center, blogs often create the buzz, but also follow the agenda set by the established media or political institutions. The situations where a blog can create such an influential buzz are dependent on a range of other factors.81 This may include the behaviour of the traditional media, and also the type of issue and its timing. For example, the CBS controversy was suited to the online discussion, given that it occurred in the context of an election where there was high interest and high stakes; that one of the key players Dan Rather was already defined in the minds of the bloggers and the subject of much discussion; and that the primary materials at the centre of this issue were available online.82 Consequently, the story was particularly open to scrutiny in the blogosphere in a way that may not be possible with many other political stories.
Even if the bloggers really are influencing public debate and opinion, their role is still subordinate to the established media. As the above examples show, their work gains significance by influencing the established media. Some reports from the US have suggested that those blogs that express views shared by the established media are more likely to gain widespread coverage and influence.83 The blogs are also dependent on the established media for their own content. Blogs tend to contain commentary and opinion, as opposed to facts. The established media are required for the primary reporting, photos and information that they comment on. In many ways, the heavily opinionated slant of the online expression means that the established media may become more influential than ever. With so much being disputed and debated, the need for an authoritative voice to provide primary content will be in demand.84 The online expression may lead to changes where the established media provide content that turns up in different places and websites. However, the role for the mass media elite remains.
The above discussion has highlighted the way in which new media elites and the established media will remain the dominant forces in political expression. It has been shown that this is likely to be the case even as the Internet grows as a source of information. The online audience no longer receives content fixed by a channel to a particular schedule, and the user has greater control in selecting what content to view and when to view it. However, as explained above, these choices will be shaped by media elites and some content will still reach a wide or even wider audience than before. Consequently, the mass media paradigm is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. Questions about how these elites use their power and how they influence politics are as relevant today as they were in the era of the mass media. This is not to overlook the greater opportunities for participation in online expression, but rather to acknowledge that online expression can take many forms, just as its offline counterpart can. Consequently, the next section will argue that the approach to regulating online expression should be tiered, with elites and established media organisations operating at one level and smaller sites and individual users operating at a different level. As stated in a recent Institute for Public Policy Research report, the challenge in media policy is to ‘handle the balance between the potentially global, all encompassing forms of expression, and very small-scale, virtually private forms of expression’.85 The goal is therefore to balance the need for diverse political coverage reaching a wide audience with a range of different viewpoints, while at the same time protecting the self-expression and participation of individuals. The existing approach to regulating the media may be applicable to certain elite content providers and gatekeepers, but should not be so widely applied or onerous as to snuff out the positive developments currently taking place online.
Go to sectionTop of pageAbstractMEDIA FREEDOM AND MODELS OF ME…HOPES AND FEARS FOR ONLINE EXP…SELF-EXPRESSION AND PARTICIPAT…MEDIA ELITES AND ONLINE EXPRES…MEDIA REGULATION AND DEMOCRATI…CONCLUSION
MEDIA REGULATION AND DEMOCRATIC VALUES
This article has focused on the way the established media, influential websites and search engines help determine the success of online expression in reaching a wide audience. A range of other private actors also impact on the opportunities for online expression, including software companies that produce user-friendly applications, ISPs and non-state regulators such as ICANN.86 Instead of eliminating the chance of private barriers to expression, digital technologies can increase the range of potential barriers. Regulation should not be ruled out, if it can help facilitate democratic expression by controlling the private power and should not automatically be prohibited by the courts. The stricter regulations associated with the broadcast model of regulation need not be rejected, but may require adaptation to some online communications if it would serve the values of freedom of expression. The difficulty is defining the boundaries between the tier of mass media entities and the tier of smaller speakers and forums outlined above.
One approach may be to find that those entities already subject to media regulations offline be subject to similar regulations online. Under this approach, the current terrestrial broadcasters would be subject to their public service duties on online, and other licensed broadcasters would have to meet the basic tier of broadcast regulations online. Such a strategy reflects the current approach and is only likely to be workable in the short-term. As the media technologies converge and more people watch programmes online it will be possible for companies and groups to distribute audio-visual programmes solely through online channels. If such newcomers gain a significant share of the audience, then it may undermine the purpose of the current regulations, as a wide range of online content similar to that found on the broadcast media will command a mass audience but remain exempt from the regulations. Furthermore, as is currently the case with cable television, the licensed broadcaster will argue that they need to be less regulated to compete with the other unregulated outlets.87 If such a relaxation of the regulations is not possible, then the regulated broadcaster may find that it is in their long term interests to distribute their content through the lesser-regulated online channels, in otherwords to opt-out of the broadcast sector. An alternative strategy could be to subject certain types of content to a particular regulatory regime. For example, the regulations applied to broadcasters could apply solely to audio-visual content. Initially this may seem appealing as it fits with current audience expectations, but it does beg the question why audio-visual content should be subject to stricter controls. Given the relative inexpense of video and audio equipment and software, audio-visual content will be used by many individuals, such as videobloggers, and not solely by media elites.
The boundary could be drawn instead between commercial and amateur entities. This could still cause difficulties, for example, a company website or content produced by an interest group should not be equated with mass media, nor should a small scale website that makes a small amount of income on advertising. It may be necessary to target those online speakers that are commercial and whose primary content is the provision of media, whether as an aggregator or provider, and which has a particular share of the market or turnover. Distinguishing the sphere of regulated mass media from other types of communication has parallels in existing law. For example, in media merger rules, newspapers are distinguished from other types of communication by reference to the frequency and content of the publication.88 Similarly elections laws distinguish newspaper and broadcaster reports from the communications of political campaigners, exempting the former from third party expenditure limits.89 Distinguishing online media outlets that are the equivalent of modern day mass media may not be a clear cut task, but has a precedent in the UK.
A further difficulty with regulating online media entities is the global nature of the Internet. The requirements of UK democracy should not be imposed on media outlets based abroad and targeting a different country, yet Internet users are still free to access this content. This raises a situation similar to that of cable television where foreign broadcasts, such as Fox News and Al-Jazeera, are thought to be straining the regulations applied to licensed broadcasts. Furthermore, European Union law imposes restraints on the capacity to regulate media providers based outside jurisdiction.90 Given the global environment of the media, traditional rules of impartiality and accuracy are being increasingly questioned,91 a trend that is likely to increase in relation to the online media. However, it would still be possible to single out those media entities whose content is targeted at an audience within jurisdiction, especially in relation to the coverage of news and politics. Those outlets focusing on UK based news are most likely to command a broad audience in the UK, and are unlikely to face greater competition from outlets covering the news and politics of a different country. In any event, as outlined below, some more partisan media content from abroad may be unproblematic, but simply should not represent the whole media landscape. The global context also raises issues of enforcement and the possibility of evasion. However, it is likely that those sites that are the equivalent of mass media would want to maintain a base in the UK, for example for its reporters or advertising, and are likely to conform to such national rules. Furthermore, the development of geographical location technology may also make it possible to limit the dissemination of material to and from foreign countries.92 A full consideration of the problem of jurisdiction and enforcement is beyond the scope of this paper. The point is merely that the global nature of online expression does not eliminate the role for the regulation of certain media entities to serve the broader needs of democracy.
If it can be established that such media entities may be the subject of regulation, it still raises the question of what regulations are necessary to serve democratic needs. So far reference has been made to broadcast media regulations for impartiality and balance in political coverage, but such regulations are not imposed on the print press. It may be argued that partisan online content serves democratic needs in the same way the partisan press does. This need will probably be found with many speakers on the new media, such as bloggers or interest group sites. While it is important, such partisan content associated with the print model need not be the norm for all online content. Rather than reflecting one model of democratic expression, the regulated tier of online expression could be designed to permit different regulatory regimes. Prior to the prominence of the Internet, Lee Bollinger argued that the different regulatory regimes for print and broadcast media are justified by balancing one another.93 Similarly, James Curran has advocated different media sectors serving separate democratic needs.94 The regulation of the new media could be designed to promote the various different functions of the media in a democracy, with different elements of the print and broadcast model to be found in different media sectors. Some areas of the web, such as original news reporting and the largest gatekeeper sites, could reflect the republican concern with balance, impartiality, and differing viewpoints, while some elements of a partisan media reflecting the liberal pluralist approach could be permitted in commentary sites such as blogs. However, even in a sector that recognises the importance of partisan content, different points of view need to be accessed and the various gatekeepers referred to above may need to act to promote access to diverse opinions. It would be unsatisfactory if the only partisan sites that could easily be found online all supported the same perspective, whether left or right.
If regulations to promote impartiality, balance, accuracy, and quality content associated with the public service function of the media are applicable to some online media, then a further question arises as to how best to achieve these aims. One method has been to propose state funded websites to act as civic forums.95 This approach represents an attempt by the state to set up an elite site of its own that will promote democratic values and reflect a public service rationale, rather than constraining private entities. The danger with setting up such a website purely for political debate is that it may draw few visitors. With such a wide range of options, people are more likely to go to the sites that are most entertaining.96 Possibly the most successful example of this type of site is the BBC, which has regularly been praised for its online services. It attracts many visitors, not just because of its well-known name, but also its wide range of content, such as entertainment or sports pages. However, dangers exist in placing all public interest requirements on one media entity.97 A variation of the public service site is the proposal by Blumler and Coleman of a public agency to promote and publicise online deliberation.98 The agency would act as a gatekeeper to some online expression, be the moderator of discussion and help facilitate the interaction of civic networks online. Such a role could be allocated to the Public Service Publisher that has been proposed by OFCOM to promote and distribute content on digital television and throug
When I am in a mood for entertainment, I love to read the redundancy in the public utterances spouted by health officials from time to time.
In a recent article in the Nation, manager of the Geriatric Hospital , Everton Alleyne is reported to have pointed out that “there was a pervasive problem of abandonment of the elderly by family members. This, he stated, was one shared with the Queen Elizabeth Hospital which the Beckles Road institution assisted by adopting those deserted seniors”.
WILL SOME ONE TELL THIS PERSON THAT THIS HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR OVER THIRTY YEARS. WILL THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION LED BY THE LOUD MOUTHED DR I WANT POWA TELL US WHAT THEY PROPOSE TO DO ABOUT IT. WILL THEY SIMULTANEOUSLY TELL US HOW THE INFRASTRUCTURAL WORK ESTIMATED TO TAKE TWO FINANCIAL YEARS TO COMPLETE AND WHICH WILL COST AROUND $ 7 MILLION CHANGE THIS SITUATION.
It was noteworthy that accompanying Minister The Loudmouthed Dr I want Powa was Senior Medical Officer of Health at the Sir Winston Scott Polyclinic Dr Ronald Knight. This medical officer has held a top post in the Ministry of Health now for almost years. He was brought back from Jamaica by his good friend, the former Minister of Health Branford Taitt. Having achieved very little of note in almost 20 years on the issue of Geriatric care, or anything else of consequence for that matter, one wonders how much he has to offer now.
I well remember this officer remarking in the early nineties that the way that decisions were made in the Ministry of Health in those days was a function of who could make the most noise, and that was invariably the minister. Dr Knight Sir, Does Dr I want Powa run the ministry of Health in similar fashion? Are you still a mouse?
Dr I want Powa is reported to say that “ within the next financial year (starting in April), the “chronic problems” plaguing the hospital would be addressed head-on.” Does he mean that he will do this by head butting the problems with the big bump in his forehead, or is he just purveying his usual delusions of grandeur. Since coming to powa, Dr I want Powa has not given us any specifics of anything he will do. He rants garrously with his non specifics. It seems we have another doctor in the Ministry of Health as the minister with no ideas. It seems that the minister has inherited in his court a cadre of brainless, functionless thoughtless doctors of whom the most senior is none other than “Gravy” Knight (so called by the Mental Nurses at BRPC because his elaborate dressing including his cowboy boots reminded them of a poor imitation of the popular Antiguan cricket entertainer.
Dr I want Powa is reported to have expressed concern about the shortage of staff at the hospital and the level of registered nurses of whom there are 128. Were any of his entourage not able to offer any solutions? After almost 20 years has “Gravy” not been able to offer a solution?.
Dr I want Powa it is not enough to say “We have to be careful how we treat staff issues as I believe strongly medical staff and nursing staff have a responsibility and duty that is unique. You are dealing directly with life and limb.” Dr I want Powa it is not enough to say that you will address the lack of resources as a matter of “urgency”. Tell us how, man. You got the powa now. Question is now, DO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY? DO YOU HAVE ANY ADVISORS IN THE MINISTRY WITH ANY IDEAS? DO YOU HAVE ANY ONE IN THE MINISTRY WHO IS LARGER THAN A MOUSE WHO CAN ARTICULATE ANY SENSIBLE IDEAS THAT YOU CAN USE? Question is DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH SENSE TO REALIZE A GOOD PLAN WHEN YOU HEAR ONE? is DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH SENSE TO PROPERLY MODIFY A GOOD PLAN WHEN YOU HEAR ONE?
The Government has changed with much fanfare. But guess what? We just have a new circus leader, but he is handling the same clowns in the Ministry of Health.
We are told also in the Nation that Dr I want Powa who also has responsibility for the BWA, spoke of his concerns while addressing constituents at his St Philip West branch meeting at Princess Margaret Secondary School in Six Roads, St Philip.
We read that “The minister described the institutions and agencies under his portfolio as in “an absolute mess” and promised to reveal everything . . . “right down to the toothbrush” whether at the BWA, the Sanitation Service Authority, the National Insurance Department, the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, the Geriatric Hospital, the Psychiatric Hospital or the polyclinics.
His revelations would come through a series of media conferences, the first of which will be in about two weeks.
Estwick also promised manpower audits at some of the institutions, particularly the hospitals, to determine the staff needed.”
Dr I want Powa we know that you are a man that love the limelight so we look forward to you making am ass of your self at the media conferences. Then you will tell us how you propose to deal with the staff shortages when you determine the staff needed.
All like now you are already learning that it is easy to go around Barbados seeking to make fun of others, when you yourself can do not much better. By now you have realized that you have a lot of dead weight at the top of the Ministry of Health. Thompy real smart though. He put you the right place so that all Barbados can see that you are ALL LOUD TALK AND NO SUBSTANCE.
I wanted to thank you for this blessed work you are doing, and also to send thoughts of love and strength to the parent/s of little Charelle who had an accident and is brain damaged. May she recover.
(Live in London, but hope to be in sunny Barbados sometime this year).
Warmest Regards,
Diana. xxx
Domestic Violence and its impact on Barbadian Society.
At this Easter time when we are in a reflective mood, perhaps it is appropriate for us to focus our attention to a kind of unjustified suffering, often endured in silence.
Only recently there were “allegations” of domestic violence in an upscale area in Barbados, the incident was widely reported on the bloggs, but the focus of attention was not on the allegation, but on other issues as a result of the incident.
What do we mean by domestic violence, it can be a “general term to describe a range of behaviour often used by one person to control and dominate another with whom they have, or have had, a close or family relationship.”
The event to which I earlier referred, was so well documented that I seek not to revisit it, but to look at the general issue of domestic violence in Barbadian society. I am not suggesting that domestic violence is particular to Barbadian society, or Barbadians are so disposed, I am simply suggesting that it does exist and should be addressed.
There are many women who suffer in silence – and a few men – as a result of imtimidation through the violence of their partners. The efforts to control through physical strength and mental intimidation, is a heavy burden for our sisters, daughters and mothers to endure ,and it can have a ripple effect on their children and also influence how those children interact with the broader society.
The children of such a domestic environment, can repeat the behaviour patterns which they have witnessed, in time this can effect how they interact with females, not inly in a relationship but even at their place of work, particularly those in junior positions.
A caring society looks after its members, particularly those who are perceived at a moment in time …as vulnerable. The attitude of might, because I am in a position to exercise it, cannot be right and has no place in a modern equitable society.
Society can only change when it changes itself, but change only comes about when behaviour is identified as unacceptable and strategies are adopted to effect change. The first step in that process is examining the behaviour itself and the causes of such behaviour.
It is easy to shy away from difficult issues but face them we must to make a better society.
[…] Submissions ← Drakes Christian School Cries Foul […]
I was rather dissapointed to read in the Nation News, in reference to HIV/AIDS treatment for foreigners a member of Parliament was reported to have said: “in our society we accept having more than one partner.”
Do we really “accept” that kind of behaviour, it is true it occurs, but is there general acceptance of it? I have simply posed the question, I have a feeling that there are many couples, married and ummarried in Barbados, who do not accept that kind of behaviour, but I could be very wrong indeed.
Tomorrow will mark the fortieth anniversary of the death of Dr.Martin Luther King, shot on the balcony of the Lorraine motel in Memphis.
The night before Dr. Knig’s assassination he said.
…” because I’ve been to the mountaintop…And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the promised land”…
One is tempted to ask is this promised land which Dr. King alluded to, the arrival of Barack Obama in the Democratic Party’s nomination?
Is there more to Barack Obama’s arrival than the simple fact of his presence as a senior politician in American politics, or is there even more to come, in that it is an awakening in American politics and Barack Obama is the one who will take African Americans to a new beginning, is this what Dr. King Saw?
[…] Submissions ← Former Barbados Government Rejected Blue Flag Membership […]
Yarbroom you maybe on to something. The MLK anniversary could serve as a fillip for Obama’s campaign because of exactly what you have tabled.
I was rather dissapointed to read in the Nation News, in reference to HIV/AIDS treatment for “foreigners”
When will we as Caribbean people stop calling our fellow West Indians foreigners? Whatever happened to “All uh we is one”?
we have come to the stage in the history of our church where pastors are saying to his members, if you dont pay tithes and offering you cannot do anything in his church. it also appears that to our church leaders that money has more value that souls
Went to a function at Savannah Hotel which was put n by Combermerians to celebrate the achievement of David Thompson. It was well attennded and the who is who of Barbados was there. The young and the old, the girls and the boys all sang the school song with gusto.
It was a great time. No wonder Cawmere is the best.
PS.Maurice Norvill was the MC not KB!!!
Her crime was to fall in love. She paid with her life.
“Rand Abdel-Qader, 17, told her closest friend that she was in love from the moment she set eyes on the young British soldier working alongside her in Basra, and she dreamt of a future with him.
It was an innocent infatuation but five months after Rand, a student of English at Basra University, met Paul, a 22-year-old soldier posted to southern Iraq, she was dead. She was stamped on, suffocated and stabbed by her father. Several brutal knife wounds punctured her slender, bruised body-from her face to her feet. He had done it, he proclaimed to the neighbours who soon gathered round, to “cleanse his honour”.
And as Rand was put into the ground, without ceremony, her uncles spat on her covered corpse because she had brought shame on the family. Her crime was the worst they could possibly imagine-she had fallen in love with a British soldier and dared to talk to him in public.
Rand was murdered last month. That the relationship was innocent was no defence. She had been seen conversing intimately with Paul. It was enough to condemn her, because he was British, a Christian, “the invader”, and the enemy. The two met while he was helping to deliver relief aid to displaced families in the city and she was working as a volunteer. They continued to meet through their relief work in the following months.
Rand last saw Paul in January, two months before her death. It was only on 16 March that her father, Abdel-Qader Ali, learned of their friendship. He was told by a friend, who worked closely with police, that Rand had been seen with Paul at one of the places they both worked as volunteers. Enraged he headed straight home to demand an explanation from his daughter.
“When he entered the house, his eyes were bloodshot and he was trembling,” said Rand’s mother, Leila Hussein, tears streaming down her face as she recalled her daughter’s murder. “I got worried and tried to speak to him but he headed straight for our daughter’s room and he started to yell at her”.
“He asked if it was true that she was having an affair with a British soldier. She started to cry. She was nervous and desperate. He got hold of her hair and started thumping her again and again.
“I screamed and called out for her two brothers so they could get their father away from her. But when he told them the reason, instead of saving her they heped him end her life,” she said.
She said Ali used his feet to press down hard on his own daughter’s throat until she was suffocated. Then he called for a knife and began to cut her body. All the time he was calling out that his honour was being cleansed.
“I just couldn’t stand it. I fainted”. recalled Leila. ” I woke up in a blur later with dozens of neighbours at home and the local police”.
According to Leila, her husband was initially arrested, “But he was released two hours later because it was an “honour killing”. And unfortunately, that is something to be proud of for any Iraqi man”….
Sunday Observer 27-4-2008
By:Afif Sarhan
Mark Townsend
Caroline Davies
Here is a suggestion. Government should open the computer centres within the various Community and Resource Centres across the island to those primary and secondary school children, as well as adults who need access to the internet to complete research. More than often I have seen parents/guardians begging people to help them their child/ward with research needed for school. In these cases it does not necessary mean that the children are doing the research but just getting information from people to complete their respective projects or in some cases other people doing their projects. This is something that can be looked into. I am sure that there are people who would volunteer their time to assist in such. I myself would.
Like I get censored yah? I hope not else all this openness talk is just that … talk.
I hope it’s not that if you say that some topics here are PURE TABLOID, you are e-muzzled.
Dear editor is that the case?
The Barbados Advocate website has not been updated since May 20, 2008., ummmmmmm wonder whats the beef
Thought for Today:
29.5.2008
“One man with God is a majority.”
Wendell Phillips
We do live in times when to standalone to represent ones belief is definitely viewed as abnormal behaviour.
Thought for Today
30.5.2008
Bludgeonings
“In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.”
W.E.Henley
I just wanted to inform BU readers if they haven’t already heard that Dr. Ikel Tafari died tonight in Trinidad and Tobago.I wish to extend condolences to his family. May his soul rest in peace
Tony Hall we trust your feedback. Does anyone have further details? This is tragic indeed. May he rest in peace.
Thought for Today
31.5.2008
“There the workman saw his labour taking form
and bearing fruit,
Like a tree with splendid branches rising from a humble root.”
Henry Van Dyke
Tafari dies in T&T
Published on: 5/31/08.
DR IKAEL TAFARI
http://www.nationnews.com/temporaryimages/bp58767.jpg
FORMER DIRECTOR of the Pan African Commission, Dr Ikael Tafari, is dead.
This was confirmed last night by Deryck Murray, acting director, who said Tafari died suddenly yesterday in Trinidad where he was attending a conference. It was not certain how old he was.
Tafari was reportedly recently fired from the top position in the Pan African Commission.
A former student of Harrison College, Tafari (christened Michael Hutchinson) was a member of the prominent Hutchinson family of Woodside, Bay Street, St Michael. He spent many years in Jamaica where he studied at the Mona Campus of the University of the West Indies and subsequently worked, before returning to Barbados.
He worked with the Pan African Commission from its inception in 1997 and eventually became its director in 2004.
Murray said that Tafari was in the twin-island republic at the invitation of National Joint Action Committee and delivered a speech on Thursday evening.
He added that there were not many details to date on the circumstances surrounding Tafari’s death but said he had taken ill at his hotel and was subsequently pronounced dead at the Port-of-Spain General Hospital.
Last night when the SATURDAY SUN contacted his relatives they requested that the paper call back today.
Tafari was a noted figure in the local and regional Pan-African movement and was a columnist in the DAILY NATION for a number of years. (ES)
Interesting article which appears in the Business Week latest edition on blogs.
Sunday 1 June 2008
Thought for Today
Wasted
“Oh, the wasted hours of life
That have drifted by!
Oh, the good that might have been
Lost, without a sigh!
Love that we might once have saved
By a single word,
Thoughts conceived, but never penned,
Perishing unheard;
Take the proverb to thine heart,
Take, and hold it fast-
“The mill cannot grind
With the water that is past”
Sarah Doudney
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE PART OF THE NEXT GENERATION OF AMERICA’S YOUNG LEADERS?
THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION IS YOUR OPPRTUNITY!
JOHN McCAIN, his entire campaign team, and the leadership of the
Republican Party in every state and congressional district in the country
will be there.
This is your opportunity to learn from and get to know GOP leaders at
every level. It is your opportunity to learn about the strategies, issues
and political tactics that will make you a better leader on your campus or
in your community.
Our exciting Gop Youth Convention program will help jumpstart or
supercharge your political career!
“GOP Youth Convention” can help you arrange low cost accommodations at the
convention, and also help you find a way of getting to the convention that
you can afford..
WHEN: LABOR DAY WEEKEND: Fri. Eve Aug 29 to Mon afternoon Sept 1 if you
can’t afford to miss classes or work.
OR: THE FULL CONVENTION WEEK Friday Evening Aug. 29th – Friday Noon Sept.
4th. if you want to see the Convention from start to finish.
WHERE: Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota
COST: As low as $150 for low-cost accommodations and the GOP Youth
Convention program over Labor Day weekend. As low as $300 for the full 7
days. Travel is additional.
HOTEL OPTIONS:
Low Cost: About $30 per day (4 people per room)
Standard Cost: About $60 per day (2 per room)
(This price does not include transportation)
If you want more information:
Email us ASAP at:
info@gopyouthconvention.org
Visit us at: http://www.gopyouthconvention.org or call us at (202)–544-7525
Let us know how long you would like to stay and whether you would prefer
to make low-cost, or standard-cost reservations.
We can provide more detailed information when you contact us.
Hotel reservations at these low prices may only be available for a few
more days so get in touch with us right away!!
GOP YOUTH CONVENTION.ORG does not support or oppose candidates for
political office and is not sponsored by or affiliated with the Republican
National Committee or the Republican National Convention.
Sunday 8 June 2008
Thought for Today
…”I have a dream.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the south with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope…”
Dr. Martin Luther King
August 28, 1963
A relevant reminder that impossible as it may seem the world can sometimes be changed by one individual. The visionary is one who can get people to follow an ideal in a way that others may not understand. They are some who say that Obama is such a man.
Osama is another.
ST are you comparing Obama to Osama why not throw Hitler into the ring then? Using extreme comparisons is not the way to go with this one we think.
The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.