SCREEN-L Archives

February 1995, Week 1

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 5 Feb 1995 11:35:58 CST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
John McInnes makes the claim that cable is not available in remote areas. In
fact, 98 % of America is cabled. Some 30% choose not to take cable -- just as
many Americans choose not to subscribe to a daily newspaper. Is the answer to
the latter a federally-funded free newspaper? PBS is not free. It is
supported by local, state, and federal taxes as well as by corporate sponsors
and station donors. In this way, it actually is more costly than commercial
television or cable, which get no tax dollars. In addition, satellite,
multimedia, VCR's etc. provide alternative services. Many libraries offer
free cassette rentals.
 
I only saw two episodes of American Cinema but concur with John's analysis,
but would go even further -- it is worse than the Hollywood specials found on
TNT, AMC, etc. It cost some $6 million tax dollars to make as opposed to the
other clip shows, which cost taxpayers nothing. Why pay for Paramount studio
public relations efforts?
 
Larry Jarvik
Center for the Study of Popular Culture

ATOM RSS1 RSS2