Comments on: MediaCon: Krugman brilliance

By: Randy Grow

Randy Grow — Fri, 16 May 2003 21:06:49 +0000

Advocating nationalization of the press is "brilliant"? Do you believe in the Constitution?

So a press directly controlled by politicians would somehow be more likely to be critical of politicians than one run by independent corporations?

Krugman speaks Newspeak.

Why are people so afraid of corporations, which have no power but to sell people things, but they don't bat an at eye putting politicians with *armies* at their disposal in charge of the same things?

By: Nienke Zwennes

Nienke Zwennes — Fri, 16 May 2003 08:29:30 +0000

Interesting article of Krugman, but one thing puzzles me. He does not explain why the Media were so critical of Bill Clinton during his regime. According to his reasoning that should not be the case.

Im not from America, but how could that be explained. I'm curious about it.

By: Mark Jeffries

Mark Jeffries — Thu, 15 May 2003 21:05:01 +0000

However, it should be pointed out that BBC America does not program news in prime time–its latest newscast is at 6 p.m. ET, which is around the time WLIW in New York feeds a BBC newscast to public television stations. BBCA’s prime time lineup is entirely entertainment programming, which makes NRO’s claim totally irrelevant–as if the right-wing wacko racists, sexists and homophobes haven’t heard *that* before.

By: scarhill

scarhill — Thu, 15 May 2003 18:34:25 +0000

The only problem with Krugman's point is that the BBC-America's primetime audience declined during the war, while FOX News' almost doubled.

See Donald Luskin's NRO column for details.

Jim

By: ToastyKen

ToastyKen — Thu, 15 May 2003 04:16:50 +0000

Fox's Neil Cavuto has fought back. But somehow, it just makes me agree with Krugman more. :)