Pay-Per-View Democracy... Or Does Anyone Care?
from the so-that's-what-we're-up-to-these-days... dept
Apparently this isn't new at all, but some people are beginning to question why some state government meetings can be viewed online only with a monthly subscription fee of $200. The article focuses on sessions of the Public Service Commission in New York State. The PSC defends the subscription practice saying it would cost $10,000 to $20,000 per month to offer the videos for free, instead of paid. Honestly, it's not clear how many people are actually bothered by the lack of these videos being available. What would have been much more interesting, however, is finding out just how many people (if any) actually cough up the $200/month to access this C-SPAN-style material.
8 Comments | Leave a Comment..
- Rep. Doyle Introduces Bill To Provide Public Access To Publicly Funded Research
- Beware Of Those Who Claim They're 'Saving The Culture Business' When They're Really Protecting Those Who Strip Artists Of Rights
- The Rise Of The 'Professional Amateur' And The Fall Of Gated, Exclusionary 'Clubs'
- OK Go Shows, Once Again, How Content Is Advertising... And How There Are Many Revenue Streams For Musicians
- We're Living In the Most Creative Time In History





Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
See things the US media doesn't show
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Because they forgot the average joe.
I hear a priest say something along the lines of "Once you've encountered demons you either go crazy or learn to laugh about them."
Let's just say I'm laughing not koo koo...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Barrier
While yes it's understandable the cost of the video service may be prohibitive, the charging of what would appear to be public content is exclusive of the ability to pay, regardless of the producer involved.
The PSC does have options. It can (1) offer reduced services that costs less, (2) supplement the service with others, or (3) remove the service altogether, among others.
$200 a month is excessive. Such an amount is clearly an economic barrier to those not of a particular economic class, thus excluding a majority portion of the public from participation.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No Subject Given
What did you think all that talk about "privitization" was about? What good are government services if the important people aren't making a profit off them?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment