mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (11/18/83)
Allan England says "a TV network has no business supporting a particular political movement." Leaving aside "The Day After", I think he is wrong. None of the 8 National networks seen in Toronto actually do support a particular political movement, but I think they bend over backwards to avoid showing politically controversial topics. In other countries, political movements do run TV and radio networks, to the benefit of democracy. The people can be informed about the nature of a controversy. Even without a dedicated political network, political statements should be possible, even common. They are, in subtle ways, anyway. They should be overt. Why shouldn't the nuclear right make a similar film about how delightful the world will be in 2583 after the population is reduced to a manageable size by a nuclear war some centuries previously? Why shouldn't the Moral Majority build their own TV network? I like the idea that the broadcasting facilities of at least some networks should be made available for use by political groups according to some fair procedure. We've got enough spectrum space now, and it works even when there are relatively few channels (e.g. Netherlands radio). Martin Taylor PS. In case you were wondering, the networks I counted are ABC CBS NBC PBS from the US, CBC CTV Global and Radio Canada (French) from Canada. One might quibble about the true network status of some of them, but they are sufficiently like networks to make the point of this argument.