3 ms·

None of the issues you cite are the fault of American media. They are at best due to lack of sufficient quantities of local production, and at worst due to loca

None of the issues you cite are the fault of American media. They are at best due to lack of sufficient quantities of local production, and at worst due to local production just not being very interesting. Given that everyone learns English, material made in that language has a bigger market and can naturally be higher budget. But that's not anyone's fault per se and cannot be fixed with bureaucratic interventions. Anyone can make local content in English and some European artists do exactly that.

wfo 10y ago
I think 'fault' is wholly irrelevant here. If we try to understand the position of the French ministers, etc, we observe changes which are destroying their culture. They are fighting to preserve it. The fact that the destruction wasn't intentional or the fault of google, facebook, amazon, etc doesn't really come into the picture. And there are a number of reasons you can give for why people tend to prefer these behemoths: network effects, production quality (i.e. enormous infusion of cash to make things flashy and glossy and shiny with no real valuable content), youth tend to rebel against their culture and adopt an alternate culture only to, as they age, realize they lost a part of themselves and reclaim it, etc. At least try to put yourself in their position and understand their argument.
- sievebrain 10y ago
  I have put myself in their position and I do understand their arguments: despite that, I think their arguments suck. Because what do they boil down to, really? It's this: Bureaucrat: You should watch what I like and not what you like, because my taste in entertainment are superior to yours This is not an argument worthy of much attention, regardless of what fancy pseudo-intellectual babble is used to justify it (of which "shiny with no real valuable content" is a prime example).
pjc50 10y ago
As 'wfo' says, speaking of it in terms of fault is meaningless. But it certainly can be an undesireable side-effect of market outcomes which absolutely can be counterbalanced by bureaucratic intervention. It's not entirely an accident that US media supports US foreign policy, either.

wfo 10y ago

I think 'fault' is wholly irrelevant here. If we try to understand the position of the French ministers, etc, we observe changes which are destroying their culture. They are fighting to preserve it. The fact that the destruction wasn't intentional or the fault of google, facebook, amazon, etc doesn't really come into the picture. And there are a number of reasons you can give for why people tend to prefer these behemoths: network effects, production quality (i.e. enormous infusion of cash to make things flashy and glossy and shiny with no real valuable content), youth tend to rebel against their culture and adopt an alternate culture only to, as they age, realize they lost a part of themselves and reclaim it, etc. At least try to put yourself in their position and understand their argument.

sievebrain 10y ago
I have put myself in their position and I do understand their arguments: despite that, I think their arguments suck. Because what do they boil down to, really? It's this: Bureaucrat: You should watch what I like and not what you like, because my taste in entertainment are superior to yours This is not an argument worthy of much attention, regardless of what fancy pseudo-intellectual babble is used to justify it (of which "shiny with no real valuable content" is a prime example).

pjc50 10y ago

As 'wfo' says, speaking of it in terms of fault is meaningless. But it certainly can be an undesireable side-effect of market outcomes which absolutely can be counterbalanced by bureaucratic intervention. It's not entirely an accident that US media supports US foreign policy, either.