NationStates Jolt Archive

From Opinions and Viewpoints, Page C1

http://kfox.gamehorizons.net/mandragoraguardian.png


It's beginning to look a lot like capitalism
PINA's first few months on the global airwaves have made it look less and less like a mouthpiece for the Reds

http://kfox.gamehorizons.net/spiridonmedis_mini.png

Ah, the joys of the free market of ideas that is the media.

After just six months on the international airwaves, no one will blame you if you have accidentally mistaken Ariddia's fledgling broadcast news network, Public International News Ariddia, not for a mouthpiece of the communist People's Democratic Social Republic, but indeed for free-market capitalism. While the nuances behind such a mistaken identification are rather subtle, once pointed out it becomes clear why certain people, including leading media analysts, find PINA to be a strange yin to Ariddia's yang.

I start with a disclaimer: a lot of people on both sides of the border are having trouble accepting, let alone comprehending, this new, cordial relationship between the PTR and the PDSRA, two ideologically opposite countries. Myself included. But I may, thusly, boldly assure you this is nothing political.

Those same people believe that Ariddia is using this new relationship as a means for catalysing the receipt of aid from the Pacitalian republic. Not only do we have our own issues to deal with at the moment, I don't think the Ariddian government has any interest in changing its ways, nor is Chiovitti spineless enough to bend over backwards, against Pacitalian ideological will, and start aiding said government.

But is the PDSRA still actually communist? If PINA is any indication, it isn't.

PINA says its aims are to portray news from the perspective of a developing country, but also to focus on news that is making headlines in smaller nations that are off the so-called "beaten path". This is honourable. But best of all, on its website (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Public_International_News_Ariddia), Public International News Ariddia says, word for word, that it was created "in direct response to the great international news networks of developed, capitalist nations".

Oh, surely not.

It should be said, perhaps, to stay the neutral course, that PINA is a capitalist venture spawned out of the dreams of a communist country to reach out to the international community. But PINA is not a communist venture at all. They are a capitalist venture as much as is your small shop, or the Anda store down the corso.

Here's why.

Recently, PINA and the Kelssekian Broadcasting Corporation teamed up to launch a new, dual-network current affairs program called Réseaux. Broadcast entirely in French, it is available to Pacitalian viewers who receive KBC Newsworld on digital subscriber line or satellite, subtitled in English and Pacitalian. This is a great idea for a news show, and a smart move for PINA, whose limited resources can now be combined with the greater reach of KBC while presenting the news through a unique perspective of two strikingly different but astonishingly similar countries.

But by partnering up with the KBC, PINA looks to be visibly trying to draw listeners and viewers away from more popular and more widely watched current affairs programming on the PBC. This is meant especially to draw viewers away from the Ariddian news network's more direct competitor, rolling news provider PBCNews24, which broadcasts in nearly four times the countries PINA or KBC Newsworld do. Trying to draw viewers away based on one's own merits is a form of competition, or at least creates a justification for it, and surely communists don't advocate competition in the market? No, no, they advocate stability through government control. While media itself is not a tool exclusive to capitalist societies, competition in any sector of the economy is. And, if we do say so ourselves, the media is a viable sector of the economy.

PINA is, therefore, caught in its own hypocrisy, or, at least, a gaping double-standard.

It's just too bad that it's not more obvious. Remove the mask that protects this secret from being revealed and you've got a real question on your hands. Because while PINA is actually a de facto capitalist experiment it seems to blatantly use the lack of commercial advertisement on its channel to simultaneously, subliminally espouse its government's appropriated ideals. A very shrewd idea, indeed.

You could say, no matter what, that PINA is betraying the ideology of its controller, the Ariddian government, simply by existing in the world of the media, newly turned a free-market industry with the advent of the podcast, vodcast, street cross, Web 2.0, et al. But more reasonably and rationally, it is doing so by engaging in blatant, direct competition with other networks. It needs to do this simply to survive in the free-market media. But while it claims to aim for a higher purpose in reporting the news that others don't, and by presenting current affairs from the perspective of a developing, non-capitalist country, this is surely a black mark that ashames it, a black mark that puts it on the same shelf as every other international news broadcaster.

Perhaps until Public International News Ariddia gets back to basics and starts living the life it was meant to live, as a mouthpiece of communist thought, Carmine Ferragamo and the BSOC should teach it a bit of a lesson by stalling its launch date. But how ironic it would be, for Pacitalians to advocate communism in doing so.

Dear me.

Bump

Merano Regency: Editorial

Major Pacitalian newspaper, the Mandragora Guardian, has criticized the popular broadcast network PINA for abandoning its country's socialist ideals. The broad-ranging Ariddian media, first to respond to Pacitalia's impending earthquake crisis, has not responded.

The Guardian's perspective seems odd. As an earnest right-wing publication, it seems rational that it should celebrate fledgling capitalism. Instead, it mocks PINA's competitive spirit. Ariddia, being expressedly socialist, and not as communist as the Guardian claims, obviously has no qualms about sponsoring a refreshing change of pace from media such as the Guardian. Is this inherently bad? Or an example of the rhetoric PINA provides an escape from? This publication will let the reader decide.

Links to the articles in question from our website: regency.me.zz

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/5728/pinaariaz1.jpg

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/301/rokotakalaspxl1.jpg

It appears the capitalists are accusing us of being like them. And Spiridon Medis, of the Mandragora Guardian, is not quite sure whether to find this disturbing or amusing.

Dismissing PINA as a “fledgling” broadcast news network, Mr. Medis reveals from the start of his opinion piece that he does not hold facts in very high regard. PINA is expanding quite healthily, thank you, Mr. Medis. It must be because of our capitalist ethics. Or could it be that our viewers experience PINA as a breath of fresh air in a world otherwise dominated by capitalist concerns?

But what is it that makes PINA, allegedly, a “mouthpiece” for free-market capitalism? Mr. Medis’ entire argument rests on a single premise. Namely, that PINA appears to compete in an international free market. To Mr. Medis, attempting to attract viewers is a form of competition, which he is unable to view in terms other than economic. And therein lies the fatal flaw of his reasoning. In typical capitalist logic, Mr. Medis reduces everything to economic issues. Competition must be about economics.

Except that it isn’t.

PINA is, of course, State-funded. In fact, it absorbs a significant proportion of the PDSRA’s tiny budget. It does not – as Mr. Medis rightly points out – rely on advertisements. It is not competing for profit. So what is it competing for?

Mr. Medis is unable to dissociate the concepts of “viewer” and “consumer”. To the capitalist mindset, the more viewers, the more consumers of a brand of media “product”. To PINA, however, attracting viewers is about bringing our perspective to a wider public. It is about providing an alternative, educating, and giving viewers the means to reflect more profoundly on the world they are a part of. This is a socialist ethos: the gift of knowledge, a concern for education and important issues, with no regard for such trivialities as market shares.

More importantly, this approach is genuinely liberating. Whereas the conservative, capitalist Mandragora Guardian must bow to its sponsors to keep the flow of advertisement funding coming, must bow to its viewers-cum-consumers to root itself in a sector of the market, and must bow to the will of its shareholders, PINA’s detachment from these shackles grants us absolute independence, making us a more reliable, trustworthy voice on the international scene.

Mr. Medis argues that, simply by existing, PINA contradicts itself. This neat trick of rhetoric, utterly void of substance, enables him to suggest, at the close of his article, that PINA be silenced. This advocate of capitalism does not, ironically, want competition from a source which rises above the market “ethos”.

After all, Mr. Medis is concerned about his paper’s profits. Fortunately for us, we are not.

Seveci Rokotakala (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Seveci_Rokotakala) is a socio-economics correspondant for PINA.

Just what is PINA?

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/5531/pinalogonewsmob1.jpg
PINA - Proto-capitalist, mouthpiece of socialism or instrument of cultural Imperialism?
___________________
From 'The Herald'
Page 21 - Comment

Public International News Ariddia, one of the world's few remaining state-owned broadcasters, has been variously described as a multi-national corporation in embryo, a stalwart paladin for the cause of collectivisation and a sinister device for spreading Ariddian culture throughout a seemingly unwilling world. Just what is this oddity really, and what does it tell us about the state of social and political rights in Ariddia?

Pacitalian newspaper The Mandragora Guardian recently reported ithat PINA could just be the first signs of a sprouting liberal economy in Ariddia, but any jubiliation at the possibility of Arridia being set firmly on the path to liberalism seems to be wildly premature. To understand why, one must examine why PINA was founded, what its aims are today and just what it has done since it burst onto the world stage seemingly from nowhere not all that long ago.

In the not-so-distant past, while my hard-working masters the owners of The Herald were engaged on their continuing struggle to expand the paper's readership at home and abroad, there was no PINA but Ariddia certainly had television. Ariddia's monopoly media companies simply chose to stay exactly where they were, content with their captive audience of people effectively prevented from leaving the country by Ariddia's moneyless economy. 'Afterall,' they may have said, 'what benefit would expansion bring us?'

And quite right too.

As good Ariddian serfs subjects citizens, the stewards of Ariddia's media could not possibly charge for their foreign services even to break even, let alone make a profit. Now whilst this may not be so bad in Ariddia - where they are free to steal share the goods produced by other good little Ariddians, it was a show stopper for expansion, which would require Ariddians to be deprived of their property to pay for services they did not only not ask for (they didn't ask for their domestic monopolies' services either), but could not even access or benefit from in any way.

And that would hardly be fair, now would it?

Well clearly it is, according to the Arridian government, which is allegedly democratically elected, who set up PINA as an aggressively expansionist international concern. So if these people, who presumably are not entirely stupid, knew full well that they would be obliguing their underlings to pay for services rendered to foreigners, how could they justify it to themselves, not least to their electorate?

Enter stage left PINA's founding principles, which I have reproduced here in full:

* to offer an "Ariddian perspective" on events and issues of international concern
* to keep viewers constantly up to date on major events
* to cover a wide variety of events in an objective manner, and comment on them in depth, to generate debate and help viewers understand the root causes and issues of events
* to increase awareness of issues considered important in Ariddia, including social issues, the environment, animal rights, the ideology underlying capitalism and consumerism, but also events in "small" countries often ignored by other international media
* to focus on the cultures and societies of an extremely wide variety of nations and societies, to promote greater awareness, understanding and acceptance of diversity

It's quite clear that we are by no means looking here at the idealised "objective, impartial and unbiased" news concern that PINA tries to portray itself as when confronted with accusations of foul play. Indeed, we are looking here at something that could easily be mistaken for the media-wing of a self-promoting government (hang on a minute...). Now, an Ariddian bureaucrat could (and probably has) easily turn around and say The Herald is biased, too, so who are you to talk, thankyouverymuch. And he would, of course, be right - my Honourable Lord and Master the Editor voted Liberal-Tory at the last election, and didn't take great pains to prevent others from getting the impression that the Liberal-Tories are really jolly nice chaps.

The difference, of course, being that The Herald is open about its bias, and if you don't like it you can buy The Parliamentarian or The Daily Sentinel or even Commonwealth Morning News if you're that way inclined. In Ariddia, until very recently with the introduction of government-approved foreign broadcasters, there was no choice. You watch the State news channels. Or you watch nothing. With a population that has spent the decades since the introduction of mass communication subjected to only one, socialist, viewpoint over and over again, is it really any surprise that 95% of the seats in the Ariddian Parliament are held by the Democratic Communist Party?

This is the most vile form of censorship. At least in a more honest country like Iragia, one can actually see the thought criminals being dragged away by the Stazi, point to it and say, "That is not right. Something must be done." In Ariddia, the all-powerful state simply removes the ability to communicate one's ideas before the thought crime is even commited.

But I digress.

PINA is clearly not self-funding. It makes a point of the fact that it does not carry advertising nor charge per view. In a bizarre sort of way, this is its "selling point" - or it would be if anything were being sold. So the Ariddian people are paying for foreigners to see the news for free. Were it not for the political bias inherent in the content, my reaction to this would be highly positive. If only foreigners could pay for my food and accomodation as well. A new car might be nice, too. But the salient point is - what does the Ariddian government see as potentially beneficial about this to make them do it and happily pay the costs involved. I have shown that it isn't profit, as there is none. So what then?

The answer is to an extent what PINA calls "promoting an Ariddian perspective" in its objectives - that is, spreading its state-endorsed political dogma. But aside from that, it is the same thing that drives socialist and communist states to construct towering statues in honour of Herr Marx, their own domestic leaders, soldiers, workers. The same reason that drove the Ariddians to build their Progress Tower (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Progress_Tower) when a simple block of flats would have done the same job for far less of The Peoples' produce: prestige. When one builds an imposing building or an oversized statue, they reason, one shows that one has power and that ones ideas are successful. The same is true of building a successful news corporation, in their eyes, as the first line of PINA's website puts quite eloquently:

Public International News Ariddia (PINA) is the PDSRA’s response to the great international news networks of developed, capitalist nations.

PINA is here not to serve the public, not to promote any particular political viewpoint, nor even to do something so banal as make money in exchange for a service. Of course, PINA may do one or another of these at some point in its lifespan, and I'm sure PINA's state-appointed leaders will not be in the least displeased if it does any of those (except perhaps pay its way), and spreading Ariddian culture according to the State probably is one of its secondary goals, but none of these are its raison d'etre. They are not why it was created. Instead, PINA was made to say "We can do it to!" to the capitalist states, which have proved quite capable of achieving great success in media as in all other sectors (and, indeed, done so quite well without having the advantage of being the state's darling, thankyou very much). PINA is a great monument to the success of central planning and the ability of the state to take money from other people without their consent in order to do something to benefit on the face of it other people, but at heart themselves.

I'm sorry to have to break it to you, Mr Medis, but Ariddia is no closer to enlightenment than it was the day before PINA popped into the mind of whatever government mandarin thought it up. In fact, the whole thing reeks of socialist planning.

Ariddia, the day will no doubt come when you too shall be blessed with a free economy and a free press. But it is not this day, nor any other in the forseeable future.

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/5728/pinaariaz1.jpg

Opinion
Samantha Laigle

An unnamed reporter in Praetonia’s Herald has responded to the Mandragora Guardian opinion piece on PINA, taking it as a starting point and excuse to criticise Ariddian society in general. Specifically, he lambasts an alleged lack of “social and political rights” in the PDSRA. His cause is that of capitalism – that is, the selfish individualism which seeks the deconstruction of society and upholds a warped and perverse set of priorities, crushing essential rights beneath the sole right it holds sacred: that to make a profit. Health, water, housing, life itself are not rights, in the capitalist ideology; the only rights are those of the privileged, who are to be left free to accumulate senseless material wealth while depriving those less fortunate of all that makes them human.

The author of the Herald’s article reveals the flaws in his own reasoning from the very start. He asks himself whether PINA may be “a sinister device for spreading Ariddian culture throughout a seemingly unwilling world”. Excuse me?

Spreading culture, knowledge, an understanding of foreign societies, and inviting viewers to open their mind to new perspectives and possibilities is “sinister”? To understand where our Mr. X is coming from, we return to the archetypal capitalist mentality. PINA is “sinister” for one reason: it intrudes on societies where capitalism is the accepted dogma, and invites people to question that dogma. It does not contribute to helping the rich make a profit; worse, it jumbles the tidy rules of market competition by acting as a wild card, free – as PINA’s Mr. Rokotakala rightly points out – of the shackles of that same market, and of all the capitalist pressures which would restrict its freedom of speech.

Our Mr. X is not interested in foreign culture. There is no material profit in learning about foreign societies. In a world in which everything must have a market value and come with a price tag, culture, knowledge for its own sake, a healthy interest in foreign societies, are aberations to be crushed. Nothing must exist outside the Market. And none must be invited to question the Market.

Freedom of thought is not yet a market commodity, and thus it has no place in this Herald reporter’s world.

As for the world being “unwilling” to receive PINA. . . Its ratings say otherwise. Mr. X is left floundering as he attempts to deny the most obvious and unquestionable facts.

On to Mr. X’s other accusations. Despite recognising that Ariddia’s is a moneyless economy, he accuses the government – has he never set foot in this country? – of robbing Ariddian citizens to fund PINA. How, one might ask, does one “rob” a moneyless citizen? Leaving aside the typical, shallow view of taxation as theft, one does not. But it would have been too much trouble for Mr. X to dig a little deeper into the intricacies of our economy.

Finally, our Mr. X alleges that Ariddia lacks a free press. This merely proves that Mr. X – unlike the numerous immigrants who come to settle here permanently – has never visited Ariddia. Not only is there a healthy debate of ideas within newspapers, but access to the Internet – and hence world press – is unrestricted. Freedom of speech, as he should well know, is sacrosanct. And when an Ariddian switches on his or her television, should he not like what he is seeing on Channel Three, or Shanal Set, or PINA, there is nothing to prevent him from switching to the the World News Company, the Kelssek Broadcasting Corporation, the Eurasian Broadcasting Group, the Swilatian Broadcast Corporation, the Cookeslandic Broadcasting Company or the San Monticaz International Broadcasting Company – all available throughout Ariddia – and instantly bring the voices of the capitalist world into his home.

Mr. X’s article is propaganda at its worst. Leaving aside the outright lies, it is defined mainly by his ignorance. And that ignorance, of course, is transmitted to his readers.

The media should not be spreading ignorance. It should promote diversity of opinions, and freedom of speech, yes, but based on fact, not on ignorance.

That is why PINA is so valuable in today’s world.

And when I say “valuable”, of course, I am not talking about its market value – the only kind of “value” our dear Mr. X knows.

Samantha Laigle works for the Secretariat for Education.

Bump