pull down to refresh
Are you saying that the government tends to take control of resources that are actually free, like the airwaves?
If that's the case, there's some truth to that due to a long held theory about public goods and common resources.
Are you saying that the government tends to take control of resources that are actually free, like the airwaves?
Friedman seems to suggest radio is a public good, i guess since the infrastructure to operate it is owned by the government. I may have misunderstood what he meant there, since actually airwaves are not "owned" by anyone.
i think you accurately summarized main point here, which is that governments can control airwaves, but they cannot control what makes it into print.
do you think it is no longer a salient point, that printed speech is not free? I can publish whatever I want online pay for it only with my private data (except on SN!). In effect, I get exposure in exchsnge for peace of mind, privacy and security, which are ostensibly not highly valued by most people.
If that's the case, there's some truth to that due to a long held theory about public goods and common resources.
what is the theory?
Basically that you can only say whatever you like in print of you or someone is willing to pay for it. On the other hand, he argues the same is not necessarily true with broadcast media. When it was just airwaves over radio, thisnwas a finite resource owned by the government.
"Broadcast" is less relevant that streaming in today's world, and the more I think about it, the logic is true today. The print part made me think especially of SN!