The debate over the AMS Directive seems to have been going on forever. Indeed, the EU has been trying to do something similar for over a decade, and AMS is actually its most successful attempt to date (assuming it finally comes into force) to get a grip on 'convergence' in the media sector.
But of course the debate is not over yet, as our new pamphlet shows quite clearly. The Commission still has some way to go to win over much of the media industry, as well as the British government. Although it has to be said that they have performed well so far in exploding some of the more extreme myths about the Directive (while amending the Directive accordingly) as Mary Honeyball MEP ably explains in the pamphlet.
The piece in the pamphlet from Sonia Livingstone and Andrea Millwood Hargrave is key to understanding the motivation behind the legislation, and we are grateful for their contribution on this. But we mut listen also to the points put forward by Vicky Read of the BSG - the nascent industry of internet broadcasting is somewhat fragile (without a settled business model as yet), and nobody has any interest whatsoever in preventing its growth and development.
As ever, we thank all of our contributors and welcome your comments on this publication, which you can find at www.knowledgepolitics.org.uk/publications.
CB
Monday 26 March 2007
Tuesday 20 March 2007
Human capital
Recently I came across a very interesting quote by the political philosopher John Gray of the London School of Economics, which summed up perfectly a lot of incoherent ideas I had been having about why the knowledge/media economy is becoming increasingly prevalent in developed Western nations like our own.
Western nations are increasingly de-industrialised due to manufacturing being outsourced to developing countries because of their low labour costs, where for all intents and purposes exploited human beings are treated as if they are machines. Western nations are therefore forced to move more and more of their economy up the ‘value chain’ of production and into the knowledge economy where their highly developed technology/communications networks, education institutions, and R & D investment can still give an economic advantage. Hence:
“…new technologies are steadily stripping away the functions of the labour force that the Industrial Revolution has created…An economy whose core tasks are done by machines will value human labour only in so far as it cannot be replaced…we are approaching a time when…almost all humans work to amuse other humans.” (John Gray, Straw Dogs, p159-160)
For what are the ‘creative’ industries of the media and knowledge economies but the one realm of human experience that cannot yet be replicated by technology?
JS
Western nations are increasingly de-industrialised due to manufacturing being outsourced to developing countries because of their low labour costs, where for all intents and purposes exploited human beings are treated as if they are machines. Western nations are therefore forced to move more and more of their economy up the ‘value chain’ of production and into the knowledge economy where their highly developed technology/communications networks, education institutions, and R & D investment can still give an economic advantage. Hence:
“…new technologies are steadily stripping away the functions of the labour force that the Industrial Revolution has created…An economy whose core tasks are done by machines will value human labour only in so far as it cannot be replaced…we are approaching a time when…almost all humans work to amuse other humans.” (John Gray, Straw Dogs, p159-160)
For what are the ‘creative’ industries of the media and knowledge economies but the one realm of human experience that cannot yet be replicated by technology?
JS
Wednesday 14 March 2007
'Friends' United?
Back in 1999, the highly successful Friends Reunited website was launched. ‘What a great idea!’ millions of new web users thought, ‘I’ll be able to find out what my friends from school are doing’ and they did. They logged on, found old friends, emailed a few perhaps, but largely (a few flings aside) most people didn’t revive old friendships. Now however, with Facebook and Myspace the opposite is true. It would appear we will never be able to leave some old friends behind.
Regardless of whether we got on with people, it’s not purely chance that we stay in touch with some friends and drift away from others each time we move job or home for example. Social networking sites invite the possibility/horror of staying e-friends forever with everyone!
There is an important point in the hipster phrase ‘Myspace used to be good, now everyone is on there’. The novelty of Friends Reunited is in comparing the sharp contrast between past and present. This will be lost on the ‘Web 2.0’ generation. Any break with the past diminishes each time someone from your school or job adds you as a ‘friend’. These sites mean we can permanently stay within an ever growing network of people we know and have known. I don’t think it’s antisocial to want to cut a few wires and say goodbye to some people.
TH
Regardless of whether we got on with people, it’s not purely chance that we stay in touch with some friends and drift away from others each time we move job or home for example. Social networking sites invite the possibility/horror of staying e-friends forever with everyone!
There is an important point in the hipster phrase ‘Myspace used to be good, now everyone is on there’. The novelty of Friends Reunited is in comparing the sharp contrast between past and present. This will be lost on the ‘Web 2.0’ generation. Any break with the past diminishes each time someone from your school or job adds you as a ‘friend’. These sites mean we can permanently stay within an ever growing network of people we know and have known. I don’t think it’s antisocial to want to cut a few wires and say goodbye to some people.
TH
Sunday 11 March 2007
PSB and national identity
It feel likes time for a recap and reassessment of Kowledge Politics' ongoing campaign in defence of public service broadcasting. Why do we think it's so important?
Well, it's not just about the BBC as an institution, but growing up in Britain, I do feel strongly about the BBC. It is one of the few UK institutions that makes me proud to be British. Not in some narrow minded ‘Little Englander’ sense, but as part of something that helps binds us together as an inclusive multicultural nation.
In the multi-channel multimedia world of ‘narrowcasting’ to ever more focused demographics, the British Broadcasting Corporation transmits to as broad a demographic as possible, an entire nation.
Furthermore, the BBC presents a positive aspect of Britain to the world in its reporting; that of openness, objectivity, and self-criticism. As Will Hutton has recently said:
‘what goes on in the minds of the BBC’s overseas listeners and viewers is highly complex. To the casual observer it appears that they are being presented with a Western, and indeed specifically Britsih, view of the world. In a sense this is true, but over a period they come to appreciate tht this view which is alos both consistent and honest. As a result, in many countries in the Middle East, for example, the BBC is trusted more than local news services. People know that the corporation is prepared to give bad news as well as the good news about Britain; because of this, they trust it to tell the truth about their own societies.’
It is in this way that an organisation created in the 1920’s can play a role in 2007 and beyond.
JS
Well, it's not just about the BBC as an institution, but growing up in Britain, I do feel strongly about the BBC. It is one of the few UK institutions that makes me proud to be British. Not in some narrow minded ‘Little Englander’ sense, but as part of something that helps binds us together as an inclusive multicultural nation.
In the multi-channel multimedia world of ‘narrowcasting’ to ever more focused demographics, the British Broadcasting Corporation transmits to as broad a demographic as possible, an entire nation.
Furthermore, the BBC presents a positive aspect of Britain to the world in its reporting; that of openness, objectivity, and self-criticism. As Will Hutton has recently said:
‘what goes on in the minds of the BBC’s overseas listeners and viewers is highly complex. To the casual observer it appears that they are being presented with a Western, and indeed specifically Britsih, view of the world. In a sense this is true, but over a period they come to appreciate tht this view which is alos both consistent and honest. As a result, in many countries in the Middle East, for example, the BBC is trusted more than local news services. People know that the corporation is prepared to give bad news as well as the good news about Britain; because of this, they trust it to tell the truth about their own societies.’
It is in this way that an organisation created in the 1920’s can play a role in 2007 and beyond.
JS
Wednesday 7 March 2007
Yes, Prime Minister
It's not often we get to include a news story about the Prime Minister on this website - he usually spends his time chasing hoodies and illegal immigrants off council estates, and that's not really our thing - so we thought we'd mark the occasion in our blog, too. Tony Blair gave a speech at the tate Modern yesterday: in fact, the speech has been described as the longest period of time a British Prime Minister has spent talking about the arts for decades.
The Tories and the Lib Dems have been complaining for a while about funding for the arts being cut. The Tories say that £200m a year has been lost for the arts and heritage. It is true that Arts Council funding has been frozen, and we all know that Lottery money is being diverted toward the Olympics. But overall you'd have to say this Government has helped our cultural industries a great deal, including with money.
The speech, of course, was full of platitudes, and little in the way of firm commitments or strategy, but then he is on his way out. I sincerely hope I have the opportunity to write a similar post to this one in the early days of Gordon Brown's premiership.
LW
The Tories and the Lib Dems have been complaining for a while about funding for the arts being cut. The Tories say that £200m a year has been lost for the arts and heritage. It is true that Arts Council funding has been frozen, and we all know that Lottery money is being diverted toward the Olympics. But overall you'd have to say this Government has helped our cultural industries a great deal, including with money.
The speech, of course, was full of platitudes, and little in the way of firm commitments or strategy, but then he is on his way out. I sincerely hope I have the opportunity to write a similar post to this one in the early days of Gordon Brown's premiership.
LW
Saturday 3 March 2007
Watch this (digital) space, if you can
Issue of the week (and a bit) has to be digital television, with three relatively big stories finding their way on to our news pages. The first two were, unfortunately, all about the Sky/Virgin spat, although the third gave us hope of a more serious debate about the future of the media.
The battle between Richard Branson and Rupert/James Murdoch has been criticised heavily by almost every commentator. I'm sure the National Consumer Council are right to defend the interests of Virgin customers who have lost some channels from their cable package, but in general I think the whole thing has been taken a little too seriously. Two rival companies trying to outdo each other in pursuit of market share - welcome to capitalism.
Obviously, it looks like Sky are winning. They've prevented Virgin taking over ITV, and also forced some popular channels off the Virgin platform. Two caveats, however. a) Ofcom will be reviewing Sky's ITV purchase... doubtless it will lead to not very much, but the investigation alone will encourage other new companies to enter the market with some assurance that Sky's monopoly will be limited. b) If Sky really think that generalist channels like Sky One and Sky News are really most successful when they restrict access to them, they're mistaken... and I bet we'll find more than adequate replacements soon enough. (This episode also helps explode the myth that BBC News 24 isn't worthwhile, by the way.)
Then there was the EDM tabled by John Grogan, calling for spectrum to be available to put HDTV on Freeview after the digital switchover. Good move - it will be interesting to see how this one turns out... one suspects Branson and Murdoch might manage to find some common ground.
RB
The battle between Richard Branson and Rupert/James Murdoch has been criticised heavily by almost every commentator. I'm sure the National Consumer Council are right to defend the interests of Virgin customers who have lost some channels from their cable package, but in general I think the whole thing has been taken a little too seriously. Two rival companies trying to outdo each other in pursuit of market share - welcome to capitalism.
Obviously, it looks like Sky are winning. They've prevented Virgin taking over ITV, and also forced some popular channels off the Virgin platform. Two caveats, however. a) Ofcom will be reviewing Sky's ITV purchase... doubtless it will lead to not very much, but the investigation alone will encourage other new companies to enter the market with some assurance that Sky's monopoly will be limited. b) If Sky really think that generalist channels like Sky One and Sky News are really most successful when they restrict access to them, they're mistaken... and I bet we'll find more than adequate replacements soon enough. (This episode also helps explode the myth that BBC News 24 isn't worthwhile, by the way.)
Then there was the EDM tabled by John Grogan, calling for spectrum to be available to put HDTV on Freeview after the digital switchover. Good move - it will be interesting to see how this one turns out... one suspects Branson and Murdoch might manage to find some common ground.
RB
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
