From: Vipul Ved Prakash <vipul@pobox.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 4aefeb5a6c7a374a93dee3192445c17b43b708012ec5455c4bf4eb056c9156f3
Message ID: <199605140416.EAA00577@fountainhead.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-25 00:09:54 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 08:09:54 +0800
From: Vipul Ved Prakash <vipul@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 08:09:54 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Spamming
Message-ID: <199605140416.EAA00577@fountainhead.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text
> The advertizers in printed & broadcast media exercise a great deal of control
> over the content. E.g., a magazine that gets revenues from tobacco ads isn't
> likely to run a story about tobacco companies trying to addict kids. That's
> why you see more anti-tobacco content in broadcast media (who can't run
> tobacco ads) than in printed media. (And there are cross-ownership
> restrictions.)
This can be true to certain extent. But if the mag doesn't maintain
objectivity, it will kill itself slowly. Same is true of broadcast media.
Vipul
Return to August 1996
Return to “Vipul Ved Prakash <vipul@pobox.com>”
1996-08-25 (Sun, 25 Aug 1996 08:09:54 +0800) - Re: Spamming - Vipul Ved Prakash <vipul@pobox.com>