Re: [Swprograms] BBC World in USA

["Scott Royall" <royall@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Already being a SWL made me somewhat used to comparative listening.

I know that Europeans take great stock in tradition. One of my college
courses was on the British "constitution," and it was a trip. We Americans
want everything in writing, but the Brits are much more relaxed about their
rights--even if they don't think they are. They don't have a single document
like our Constitution or Bill of Rights. Instead, they have a group of laws
and traditions that every administration is expected to follow. My
instructor, who was a full professor with years of time in the UK, couldn't
fully explain how new laws were kept within those bounds. It comes down to a
popularity contest, but that only works as long as the administration plays
along. The fact is that UK governmental mechanics have evolved over the last
two hundred years exactly because they don't have a formal system of checks
and balances.

What brings this to mind is a huge controversy currently brewing in the UK
over Internet privacy. A few companies are paying the big British ISPs to
let them install boxes that can monitor everything a user does on the 'Net.
I'm talking about something that makes Echelon look tame. The Brits have
some solid privacy laws, but those are just normal pieces of legislation
subject to repeal. In parliamentary governments, traditions are counted on
heavily, but they do slip around over time. Thus, the Dutch might do well to
not be too complacent about the impartiality of 	RN.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:swprograms-bounces@hard-core-
> dx.com] On Behalf Of Richard Cuff
> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 7:32 PM
> To: Shortwave programming discussion
> Subject: Re: [Swprograms] BBC World in USA
>
> In high school, you say?  Indeed, a wonderful course...that ought to
> be required everywhere.
>
> My hat is off to Mrs. Gulick!  The intrigue is what the term
> "government-sponsored" means.  The folks at Radio Netherlands will
> argue voiciferously that Dutch law and tradition provides sufficient
> separation from the funders and the editors such that editorial
> integrity is not compromised.
>
> Whether or not one wishes to divine agendas for all public or private
> broadcasters, I'll agree 100% that every broadcaster has some sort of
> agenda, and we owe it to ourselves to be comparative listeners.
>
> Richard C
>
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Scott Royall <royall@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Well, maybe my high school education in Baton Rouge was unique. It
> > apparently was, according to your opinion. One of the courses I took was
> > something called "Media Comprehension," taught by a feisty little old
> > English teacher. The course covered a spectrum of topics from the six
> > strategies behind all advertising to decoding and filtering all news
> > sources. The last thing Mrs. Gulick wanted was for us to depend on
> > government-sponsored news.
> _______________________________________________
> Swprograms mailing list
> Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
>
> To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@hard-core-
> dx.com?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.



_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms

To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.