4 Comments

Summary:

Well despite our continuing blog-bashing, I still love TP, and he reciprocated the sentiments. Here is his latest on the whole situation. I am still going to call Powell’s column just that, not a blog post, and when he writes great stuff, I will blog to […]

Well despite our continuing blog-bashing, I still love TP, and he reciprocated the sentiments. Here is his latest on the whole situation. I am still going to call Powell’s column just that, not a blog post, and when he writes great stuff, I will blog to it. On the flipside, I am making headlines on Tony’s AO, so that cannot be bad, right. You can post here, or there! PS: you don’t want to see me in undies!

By Om Malik

You're subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

Related stories

  1. This seems to be a wonderful demonstration of the blog model. Let’Äôs recount’Ķ as of now:

    1. A debate has irrupted, involving many participants, about what constitutes a blog. [Good thing]
    2. Michael Powell seems to have loosened up and is getting into the blogging thing.. he is on his third post [Good thing]
    3. Tony and Om seem to have reconciled their differences, and Tony somehow managed to take a shot at liberals during the process. [Not bad thing]

    Seems like a fruitful medium to me. Now, to truly complete the circle, we will need Mike Powell to opine.

    Share
  2. I’m not sure why it’s so important to not call what Powell is doing a blog. Whatever.

    At least he’s not a crook, a Telco exec or Hollywood slimeball. It could be worse. He could ENJOY enforcing those indecency laws.

    Share
  3. good point marc – but call me a purist on this one – i still think its an online column, and is becming a great one. but not a blog post. well he should enjoy the indecency laws and thank god he is not a telecom exec or a hollywood slimeball.

    Share
  4. Powell has led the indecency crusade by: 1) Overturning years of reasonable FCC precedent in order to crack down on indecency; 2) Revived the profane language doctrine, which the FCC had never before used; 3) Has not spoken out or done anything with regard to the organized flood of complaints by the Parents Television Council (why do you think complaints have increased from 111 in 2000 to 540,000 in the first quarter of 2004?); 4) Plans to require stations to maintain tapes of their broadcasts for 60-90 days in order to fight indecency, and will still go after stations even after they’ve legitimately gotten rid of the tapes; and, 5) Claims that cable TV and broadcast TV should have the same indecency standards (which, since he supports the existing broadcast standards means he thinks we need indecency regulation for cable).

    I hate to think what the FCC would be doing if Powell actually enjoyed enforcing the indecency laws.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post