Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!RED.RUTGERS.EDU!mcgrew
From: mcgrew@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Newsgroups: mod.politics
Subject: (none)
Message-ID: <12231290591.47.MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Sat, 16-Aug-86 12:05:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: RED.12231290591.47.MCGREW
Posted: Sat Aug 16 12:05:55 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Aug-86 23:25:57 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mcgrew@red.rutgers.edu
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 62
Approved: poli-sci@red.rutgers.edu


[ Since my reply to Keith is fairly long, I'm going to include it as a
separate entry - CWM]

Keith writes:

	This is unfortunate, since TV seems to have an inherent
	liberal bias.

... well, there isn't much to be said about that, except to say that
its in fact the PEOPLE who work in TV who might seem to have a liberal
bias - one also hears this same complaint about print.  What
conclusion are we to draw from this?  I'm biased about this; my dad is
a career newspaper man, so watch what you say! :-)

		 There is a terrible view that people will believe
		whatever appears on the screen (most often held by
		those whose opinion is not broadcast in prime-time).

	 A lot of people do.  If they don't, why do advertisers pay so
	much for a few seconds of air time?

... because of the reach of the medium.  TV gets to a lot more people
than billboards or print ads, so there's more advertising bang for the
buck.  My understanding of advertising is that the main thrust of TV
product advertising is to get the viewer to remember (favorably) the
product when they are in the store.  I don't think any ad-man really
believes they can impell a viewer to buy a product.  That's about the
sum of why TV advertisers pay the big bucks.

		 You want your views sent out?  Pay the money.  Buy
		the commercial time.

	 It is hard to get libertarian philosophy across in any kind
	of coherent way in 30 second spots.  Especially on a medium
	that is much much better at showing the state of a candidate's
	teeth than the state of the union.

... well, then I'd say that you'd better pick another medium.  If you
complain that TV doesn't show your ideas in a favorable way, then say
it *can't* show it in a favorable way, I think you're out of luck...

	Perhaps gun use should be taught in high school?

Perhaps; but what about all those adults who are all ready out of high
school - its they who will have the guns!

		 Shotguns don't do well against a B-52 strike (i.e.
		our government will always have bigger guns).

	  Tell that to the Vietnamese.

... well, there's over a million of them I can't tell that to, they're
dead.  Why don't we ask the dead of Dresden, or Hamburg, or Tokyo, or
Nagasaki?  And please don't trot out those US Strategic Bombing Survey
statistics, they don't help.  In the event of a real civil uprising in
the United States, unless the entire population were to rise up (which
is doubtful) a million casualties should be quite enough to end it.

Charles
-------
-------