I'm rising to a dare here (you know who you are) where I was asked my opinion on FoxBlocker. From my perspective, it's a misguided attempt to help a certain group of people control their world (with political feedback) in the same way other groups often try to use government control.
I'm not a fan of Fox (outside of NFC football) and most friends know that (everyone does now). The various Fox news properties do seem to go beyond the call to shape and control the news and opinions they pass along. Established as an old fashioned type of network (broadcast with all the rights and responsibilities that go along with it) only 20 years ago, Fox seems to work very hard to rewrite the rules in new ways. That's not a bad thing, but does deserve attention. The really hardline opinion seems to happen on the cable side of the organization where the rules are wide open, which seems right to me. The alternative is cable censorship, which has lots of fringe support with the idea that each side will be able to eliminate ideas they find reprehensible by totalitarian rule. That one side or the other will lose badly is always overlooked and is the single biggest advantage of an open society.
I see little difference in a drive from the liberal side to limit and quarantine conservative ideas and opinions from Fox (does it block all Fox properties?) to a general conservative TV and radio disposition to denigrate any (and every) kind of liberal concepts.
Except for one thing.
Being liberal generally means being broad-minded, open to new ideas but (this is important) not limited by authoritarian attitudes. This is probably the biggest problem people have with conservative media; a complete lack of empathy and consideration for the other side.
All the same, emulation isn't a solution.
Posted by Dave at March 27, 2005 09:32 PM