Robert Samuelson can't find any facts to support his argument
In editorial, Samuelson argues that The idea that "big media" has dangerously increased its control over our choices is absurd. He then cites:
Travel back to 1970. There were only three major TV networks (ABC, CBS, NBC); now, there's a fourth (Fox). Then, there was virtually no cable TV; now, 68 percent of households have it. Then, FM radio was a backwater; now there are 5,892 FM stations, up from 2,196 in 1970.
If you don't like radio, you can listen to a Walkman or pop a CD in your car player; in 1970, people had only bulky stereo systems. The alternative to TV is the VCR (85 percent of households) or, increasingly, the DVD player. Then there's the Internet.
Somehow, Samuelson misses the whole point of the discussion - that TV stations, cable channels and radio stations are increasingly owned by a few companies. Samuelson quotes lots of statistics, but none about this point.
My guess is that Samuelson knows that the facts support the case that media concentration is getting worse. But why write a column that argues the opposite of the truth? Is it because somebody in Big Media leaned on him to write a column of support?
6:14:27 AM 
|
|
