Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: June 5461
Next month in: 01:56:53
Server time: 14:03:06, March 29, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): HopesFor | Paulo Nogueira | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.

Bill: Freedom from Corporate Media Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: Democractic Socialist Party of Lodamun

Status[?]: passed

Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: April 2091

Description[?]:

This is the issue that will never die. I am here to try once again to bring back public television and radio.

Each regional trust must guarantee that its programming is:

1. Educational (including the use of drama, documentary and sport for general consumption or directly linked to provision for schools, colleges or universities)

2. Information (including current affairs, comment and analysis)

3. Carries no ads or product placements

Each trust must also guarantee to work within the financial allocation it receives and may not borrow money against projected income.

Private broadcast companies must allow use of their transmitters for regional broadcasts, without charge.

Should any trust fail to comply with requirements, The People's Voice Broadcast Agency may disband the trust, freeze assets and hold elections for a new trust.

All revenues from sales of any programmes shall be divided thus:

65 per cent to the regional trust which produced it
10 per cent divided between each of the other trusts
5 per cent to the Nationwide IDB Trust
5 per cent to the private companies which provide transmission facilities
15 per cent to The People's Voice Broadcast Agency to fund research, development, exploration and pilots of similarly independent broadcast and publishing ventures using existing and emerging technologies.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date09:01:12, August 03, 2005 CET
FromDemocractic Socialist Party of Lodamun
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageCommence debating.

Date09:16:10, August 03, 2005 CET
From Tuesday Is Coming
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageSee:
http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=4961
http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=8310
http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=8331
http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=10857
http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=9933
http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=9934

Date13:12:18, August 03, 2005 CET
From National People's Gang
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageAn opinion survey in June 2089, showed massive support for government subsidy of higher education tuition fees. Almost 67 per cent of people were in favour of some sort of government subsisdy. Perhaps most interesting was that 40.34 per cent supported full government subsidies.

Clearly, the people are not entirely happy with the current subsidy only being available to students of low income families.

http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewnews.php?newsid=4187

In 2069 the CCF-Greens proposed a University of the Air:

http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=5706

This was defeated at the time for party-political reasons rather than impracticality.

As Education is now part of our portfolio, we have been considering options for meeting the people's demands for across-the-board funding - and believe the CCF-Green solution is one of the best.

If a further proposal is added to this bill to include higher education tuition fees for all students being subsidised by the government, we will gladly apportion some money from the education budget to help fund this project.

However, in order to ensure the network is valid as an educational resource, we would wish to include particular clauses in the charter :

1. There is no advertising
2. Editorial control is totally independent of government
3. Political content is balanced and contextual


Date16:36:55, August 03, 2005 CET
FromAdam Smith Party
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageIf 40.34% were in favour of fuyll government subsidies, then 59.56% were not in favour of this. As we do provide subsidies for the low income group, the current situation with regard to that issue would seem to be the one that best fits our poipulation's preferences. It is far from clear that the people are not happy with the current subsidy being only for the low income group.

It is worrying that our minister for educaton seems to think that learning at a distance is an acceptable substitute for the intellectual rigours and demands of presential education. While distance learning is a useful tool for those nations that do not have the transport infrastructure to make school attendance possible, our nation does have this infrastructure. Education is of course, much more than just the distribution of information. It is a social and socialising activity. It is in the classroom that we obtain our identities as members of our community. Our socialist colleague appears to think that socialisation is not necessary and would prefer to isolate people from one another and use a magisterial rather than interactive mode of teaching. We suggest he reads a few distopian novels to see how this model of education is viewed.

We would have no objections to a law requiring private media to provide two hours in every 24 to our education system for dissemination of information and to assist in providing a background culture level in our nation, so long as this law applied to all media broadcasters. However to create and fund a purely educational network is ineffective use of resources.

Firstly the meaningful attention span of people with regard to absorbing new information is in the order of 45 nminutes (this applies to all people), so broadcasting longer time periosds is simply a waste.
Secondly a purely educational network is going to be ignored and entertainment networks chosen instead by the majority of people. It is far more effective to have ten to fifteen minute items interspersed amongst the entertainment in terms of reaching the audience.

So we oppose for pedagogical rather than ideological reasons. (We also oppose on ideological reasons, but those have already been debated as indicated by TiC.)

Date16:50:25, August 03, 2005 CET
FromCooperative Commonwealth Federation
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageThe Greens would of course support a project along the lines of the University of the Air.

If the ASP beleives in the socializing value of ediucation, then let it support the return of compulsory education. With that option lost, distance-based education is all the more vital. It is ironic to see the values of society extolled by a party that has inflicted such damage on our social fabric through slash-and-burn social policy.

Date17:40:22, August 03, 2005 CET
FromAdam Smith Party
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageThat we support a value, GA, does not mean that we believe that this value should be imposed on others. This is the fundamental difference between our party and yourselves.

We are tolerant of divergent opinions, we accept that our values and beliefs do not have to be those of everyone. You on the other hand are showing yourselves to be truly totalitarioan, The total of the people have to believe what you believe for you to be content.

Compulsion is wrong, even if it is to something that we believe to be right. However it appears that you have no qualms about trying to imposing your beliefs on others.

We ask you to show where we have supported or proposed any slash and burn policy. The rhetoric does not match the evidence. We have supported, at all times, policies directed toward maximising choice and have encouraged that choice to be a considered and informed one. The only instances where we support regulation over informaton is where no considered choice will be made anyway.

Date18:44:13, August 03, 2005 CET
FromDemocractic Socialist Party of Lodamun
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
Messagei may have stolen a lot of words from one of Equisita's bills. I'll take them down if you mind.

Date20:34:36, August 03, 2005 CET
From National People's Gang
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageIt's okay, no problem.

Date23:53:05, August 03, 2005 CET
FromAdam Smith Party
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageNon professional production? Funding hobbies again. If so we demand that you also fund our computer hacking clubs, and our basejumping societies, our paintball groups, studios for our DJs to mix their music, dungeons for our B&D afficionados, dragstrips for our street racers, bongs for our dopeheads, etc. etc. Don't be selective in funding hobbies, after all taxation is not selective.

Date02:10:52, August 04, 2005 CET
FromCooperative Commonwealth Federation
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
Messagesupported.

Date02:40:46, August 04, 2005 CET
FromAdam Smith Party
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageGood to see the level of the debate is being extended from two syllables to three - sup-por-ted. Big word there GA. We have another three syllable word for you - op-pos-ed.

Date07:04:17, August 04, 2005 CET
From Tuesday Is Coming
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageTwo 3-syllable words from us:
Com-plete-ly op-pos-ed

Date23:05:21, August 04, 2005 CET
FromDemocractic Socialist Party of Lodamun
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageIll never change any side's minds on the issue so ill move it to vote and cross my fingers.

Date23:21:39, August 04, 2005 CET
From Tuesday Is Coming
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageWhat revenue? Advertising is the source of most television and radio revenue, and it is banned...

Do the percentages divide up the losses?

Date23:11:08, August 05, 2005 CET
FromAdam Smith Party
ToDebating the Freedom from Corporate Media Act
MessageLet us see. The program production is funded by the people trhough taxation. The producers are to be amateurs, the content is not to be popular. So there is then a very very slim chance that one program in every few hundred will be sold to a foreign broadcaster. (No self respecting Lodamun media company would touch this stuff, they have standards to keep). So the income from this sale, instead of going to the backers, i.e. the people, now fgoes to the amateurs who made the program. Thus making them professionals and debarring them from ever producing for this system again.

We get it.The idea is to ensure that even if a good program is accidentlyu produced, the producers are prevented from accidentaly repeating this feat. Brilliant!

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
     

Total Seats: 262

no
  

Total Seats: 171

abstain
 

Total Seats: 17


Random fact: In general, role-play requires the consent of all players.

Random quote: "There is no problem that cannot be solved with diplomacy or debate. Anyone who thinks otherwise does not need a gun, but a direct ride to a mental health clinic." - Ascentio Cartaginese, former Istalian politician

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 81