roundtable: Re: OP-ED ON TV - PUBLIC

roundtable: Re: OP-ED ON TV / PUBLIC

Re: OP-ED ON TV / PUBLIC

Jeff Briggs (jbriggs@capital.edu)
Thu, 19 Jan 1995 04:27:44 +0500 

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 04:27:44 +0500
From: jbriggs@capital.edu (Jeff Briggs)
Message-Id: <9501190927.AA20783@athena.capital.edu>
To: roundtable@cni.org
Subject: Re: OP-ED ON TV / PUBLIC


The purpose is not that we all agree. Our disagreements are based on 
values. Our discussion of the -isms *is* relevant, because these are 
reasons behind our opinions, and they are critical for debating the
future of telecommunications. 

     What is desirable, and why, are things that have been fruitfully 
discussed here. "Meaningless exchanges of rhetoric" are in the 
eye of the beholder. There is rhetoric yes - including me -but if
you read most of the letters carefully there is a core idea worth
debating.

     Nor is it a preference for arguing. We can all agree (can
we not) that some large dollop of public access communications
space should be available in the future technology.

Jeff Briggs
jbriggs2capital.edu

[CNI Home Page]