Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

shakran · 12-30-2005, 08:40 PM

re: the high tech gear. yeah, you kinda do, unless you want your videocast to look like all the other home videos you see on the net

And it's not just the imaging, it's the weight and balance of a pro cam - one reason home movies always look like they're shot in an earthquake is because those tiny cameras are hard as hell to shoot steady with.

And I'm not saying buy the 75k cam - you could probably get away with a $12k one. But the point is that news gathering is very expensive and you have to take that into consideration. Look at it this way. Something happens in, say, madagascar that needs to be covered. How is this website gonna pay to send a journalist out there unless it generates money.

PBS is a good example of a media outlet that gets a lot of its funding from the government. Now, that's not a bad thing at all, but the likelihood that this website could follow the PBS funding model is rather slim.

I completely (obviously) agree that we should return to the fairness doctrine. But I don't think it's gonna happen. The corporations that own media outlets don't want it because then they'd have to go out and get differing opinions, and that costs money. And since the corporations have a huge influence on what the FCC does, the FCC doesn't want it either.

12-30-2005, 08:40 PM	#65 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	re: the high tech gear. yeah, you kinda do, unless you want your videocast to look like all the other home videos you see on the net And it's not just the imaging, it's the weight and balance of a pro cam - one reason home movies always look like they're shot in an earthquake is because those tiny cameras are hard as hell to shoot steady with. And I'm not saying buy the 75k cam - you could probably get away with a $12k one. But the point is that news gathering is very expensive and you have to take that into consideration. Look at it this way. Something happens in, say, madagascar that needs to be covered. How is this website gonna pay to send a journalist out there unless it generates money. PBS is a good example of a media outlet that gets a lot of its funding from the government. Now, that's not a bad thing at all, but the likelihood that this website could follow the PBS funding model is rather slim. I completely (obviously) agree that we should return to the fairness doctrine. But I don't think it's gonna happen. The corporations that own media outlets don't want it because then they'd have to go out and get differing opinions, and that costs money. And since the corporations have a huge influence on what the FCC does, the FCC doesn't want it either.