Here’s a letter that I sent today to the Wall Street Journal:
David Perel offers good reasons why today "Everything About Politicians Is Fair Game" (September 11, 2008).
But
Mr. Perel overlooks what is surely the fundamental reason:
tit-for-tat. Because everything about private citizens has become fair
game for politicians – everything from our retirement planning to what
we ingest and even to the sizes of our toilet tanks – it is not
surprising that citizens eagerly pry into the intimate lives of
politicians.
Those who raise busy-bodyness into a chief motive-force of public policy can hardly complain when their officious
Frankenstein monster turns on them.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Podcast RSS Feed
Full EconTalk Text
{ 50 comments }
Don,
Beautiful.
I have often thought the public's infatuation with the private lives of celebrities exploded around the same time celebrities decided they should tell the public how things ought to be.
I know you hear this often, but please keep up the good work.
“We have learned to understand interest-group politics; we no longer have a romantic vision as to how the state operates.“
— James Buchanan, The Annual John Bonython Lecture [March 27, 1990]
There is much to despise about the original opinion piece (is 'opaque snarkyness' too obscure of an insult?).
Near the end of it was: "Inevitably the mainstream media, suffering from the corporate pressures of diminishing profits, will yield to new media and its populism."
Gee whiz Mr. Perel, what year could that also be true of? 1912? 1952? 1892? It's one thing to write weak copy for an historically important newspaper, but it's another to be utterly clueless about the history of political journalism. I am shocked, shocked I say, that 'tabloid journalism' is driving election coverage.
I need to go talk to Gary Hart about this.
Nothing else needs to be added to that post. It says it all!!
Politics is the realm of incompetence.
The other candidate is less incompetent than our candidate.
Tabloid journalism is the results of "free-market corporate journalism". The fact that this stuff is what sells best in such a system is just one clue to the potential failures of markets.
NPR and foreign newspapers for me.
I recommend to Muirgeo my colleague Tyler Cowen's 1998 book In Praise of Commercial Culture (Harvard University Press), and Tyler's 2003 book Creative Destruction (Princeton University Press).
In these works, Tyler explains how market cultures are rich and vibrant, filled with experimentation and produce fabulous outcomes over time. Sure it also produces cultural products that many of us who read Cafe Hayek regard as trashy, but that's part of the price to pay for the rich and vibrant culture that we do have.
By the way, I'm less inclined than is Muirgeo to cite the existence of things that I personally dislike as evidence of market failure. The market does not exist to please ME exclusively.
"Tabloid journalism is the results of "free-market corporate journalism"…foreign newspapers for me."
Funny thing to say, considering that the best selling newspaper in Germany is a tabloid(Bild).
The fact that this stuff is what sells best in such a system is just one clue to the potential failures of markets.
Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that most consumers of 'this stuff' were educated in government schools, would it?
Pravda was a great news agency during the soviet reign. They spoon fed the Comrades with their version of the news. It was free. What is there not to like.
Oilshock,
Anytime you want to sit down and compare the accuracy and relevancy of Fox News, The New York Post or the Washington Times with NPR's coverage of events let me know.
And again I'm not complaining of the what the corporate media produces or of their right to exist and make a profit. I just don't support them with my dollar and I'm just glad NPR exist as an alternative.
Actually I do support corporate media because I have Dish-TV. But I do write them in hopes that they will soon offer ala acarte programming.
And I do agree in some cases the large multi-media conglomerates should be broken up.
When a company like GE runs the media and bids for sales of weapon contracts that's a conflict of interest we should not tolerate.
"I just don't support them with my dollar and I'm just glad NPR exist as an alternative."
Which you support with my dollar. How kind.
Muirgeo,
Airwaves are one of the most highly regulated of all industry. The regulations make it almost impossible for a small company to get a foothold.
Thank god for the internet, blogs etc. But then I am not sure how long the internet will remain unregulated.
FCC is a fascist organization
Freeeeeeeeeddddddddoooooooooooom
I just don't support them with my dollar and I'm just glad NPR exist as an alternative.
That's a hypocrisy we should not tolerate.
Pravda means "truth", Oil Shock! Are you against truth? You aren't afraid of truth, are you? We the people want more truth, not less. This is proof that you La LA libertopian types are against more liberty and I'm for more liberty with my NPR and my Pravda.
There are only three ways to get something:
(1) by trading,
(2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or
(3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you").
Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.
The gentle invisible hand vs. the visible fist of force.
You want to see dog-eat-dog? Look at the notorious Kelo Supreme Court decision on imminent domain. The government now has the power to seize your home or business and turn it over to other private individuals.
You want to see dog-eat-dog? Look at the billions of dollars that are taken from American taxpayers every year and handed over to well-connected corporate interests.
You want to see dog-eat-dog? Look at an IRS audit.
We have a dog-eat-dog government.
Let's look more closely at cooperation. The gentle invisible hand vs. the visible fist of government.
Here's a question for you: Would you rather visit Wal-Mart or the Department of Motor Vehicles? Of course, at the DMV you get something free — free grief, at no extra charge.
Yes, there are rude people in the marketplace. But it's easy to quit doing business with them.
Contrast that to dealing with the government. Perhaps no one has ever better summed up what its like to interact with the government than the French political theorist, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. In 1849, he wrote:
“To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-ridden, regulated, penned up, indoctrinated, preached at, checked, appraised, seized, censured, commanded, by beings who have neither title, nor knowledge, nor virtue. To be governed is to have every operation, every transaction, every movement noted, registered, counted, rated, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, refused, authorized, endorsed, admonished, prevented, reformed, redressed, corrected.”
Compare that to the gentle hand of the free market. If you don't like the way one grocery store treats you, you can go elsewhere. If you disagree with your church, you can choose another denomination — or none at all.
But with government, we don't have that choice.
What if you don't like the Post Office? Try getting a letter mailed by someone else. Sorry, but you can’t do it, because the USPS is a government-enforced coercive monopoly.
Or try telling the IRS you don't like the way the government spends your money, and see where that gets you.
The gentle invisible hand vs. the visible fist of government.
Which you support with my dollar. How kind.
Posted by: DJB
Trust me DJB the life time tax dollar support you put towards NPR is less then amount oil speculators took from your pocket during the month of June. At least if you listen to NPR you'd understand how regularly your being ripped off by the "free market". Further , mine and yours tax dollars go to support the private media in the form of the FCC as well
I'll gladly give up the FCC, are you willing to give up NPR?
I just don't support them with my dollar and I'm just glad NPR exist as an alternative.
That's a hypocrisy we should not tolerate.
Posted by: Methinks
Hey as soon as you and your Wall Street buddies stop raiding the treasury we can start talking about exempting you from NPR taxes. But for now I'm guessing you all have took way more then the life time amount ever put up for NPR funding.
Do you actually NOT listen to NPR or other public broadcast?
I'll gladly give up the FCC, are you willing to give up NPR?
Posted by: Sam Grove
I think I'd call that a deal. Although I'd like to hear some one more informed then me on the downside of not having an FCC.
This is proof that you La LA libertopian types are against more liberty and I'm for more liberty with my NPR and my Pravda.
Posted by: Methinks
Almost every study done on the subject shows regular NPR listeners are more educated and more informed then their broadcast media cohorts. So your just talking crap and non-sense.
The public news media is a great example of an area where the public system is more effecient then the private one. And actually it's a great example of how we should in many cases have competing private and public systems.
Did someone say “Dependence on Foreign Oil”?
This myth basically suggests that the problem with oil prices is due to America's "dependence" on foreign oil. One of the worst economic myths, it plays on economic nationalism and on xenophobic feelings that are sometimes pervasive in the United States.
The high price of oil has nothing to do with its origin; the price of oil is determined in international markets.
Even if the United States were to produce 100% of the oil it consumes, the price would be the same if the worldwide supply and demand of oil were to remain the same.
Oil is a commodity, so the price of a barrel produced in the United States is basically the same as the price of a barrel of oil produced in any other country, but the costs of labor, land, and regulatory compliance are usually higher in the United States than in third-world countries.
Lowering these costs would help increase supply. Increasing supply, whether in the United States or elsewhere, will push prices lower.
Importing a product does not mean you "depend" on it.
Let me say that again – IMPORTING A PRODUCT DOES NOT MEAN YOU "DEPEND" ON IT.
This is like saying that when we "import" food from our local supermarket we "depend" on that supermarket. The opposite is usually true; exporters depend on us, since we are the customers.
Also, importing a product usually means buying at lower prices, whereas producing in the United States often means consuming at higher prices. This point is proven when we see the cheap imports we can purchase from China and the higher prices of many of these same products manufactured in the United States.
The amazing thing is that the protectionists claim, on the one hand, that America should be "protected" from cheap imports, but when it comes to oil, they say we should be "protected" from "expensive imported" oil.
Most, if not all, of the higher price of oil can be explained by the expansion of the money supply or the debasement of the dollar. The foreign producers are not at fault; our national central bank is the culprit.
No, I don't listen to NPR, FOX, MSNBC, etc.
They have little to tell us that's worth my time. They may be good on events, but are very poor on prioritization or interpretation.
They are magnifiers of the unusual and perpetrators of unacknowledged bias.
Almost every study done on the subject shows regular NPR listeners are more educated and more informed then their broadcast media cohorts.
Liberals are, by and large, reasonably intelligent and well educated.
This does not mean that they have an accurate view of reality or grasp of economic fundamentals.
While the general, popular media consuming, public may be mostly ignorant of or indifferent to economic realities, I am of the opinion that avid consumers of NPR are mostly in ERROR in their political and economic views.
Muirgeo,
What do you know about Methinks that make you believe he is a buddy of Wall streeter? Discussion is one thing ( rational or otherwise ) but innuendos another. Buddy of Wall street are Warren Buffet, Barney Frank, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, Henry Paulson, Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan etc. Then there are a lot of socialist sheep that think bail out of Bankers are necesary, they may not want to be friends of Wall street, but they are, nonetheless.
Collectivists view people as groups, very rarely see the individuals. Before you generalize, think if all human beings are bad, whether on wall street or not! Is that a personal philosophy of yours?
That the wholly regulated airwaves are dominated by weapons contract bidding corporations like GE while we have this discussion on an unregulated blog on an unregulated internet is a fact apparently lost on muirgeo.
I was reading a speech by Bill Moyer in which he basically stated that there needs to be more publicly funded airwaves because we need more dissent! Can you believe that? An utter oxymoron. Somewhere in the minds of Bill Moyer and presumbably muirgeo, it makes sense to have the government fund dissent!
Unbelievable.
Trust me DJB the life time tax dollar support you put towards NPR is less then amount oil speculators took from your pocket during the month of June.
How about we don't trust you. How about you present a cogent argument and we'll decide if it makes sense or not. First, you may want to look up "cogent" in the dictionary and then have someone explain the definition to you.
But for now I'm guessing you all have took way more then the life time amount ever put up for NPR funding.
If only you'd written "done took" we could have called it "ebonics".
Almost every study done on the subject shows regular NPR listeners are more educated and more informed then their broadcast media cohorts. So your just talking crap and non-sense.
So you think simply listening to NPR means you're smart? You'd think a genius like you would know the difference between a possessive pronoun (your) and a contraction (you're) along with basic punctuation.
"The idiot who praises with enthusiastic tone / Every century but this and every country but his own"
Gilbert & Sullivan, The Mikado.
Enjoy the European Newspapers !
Ahh yes the impartial, intellectual foreign press—nothing like the rigor of the Guardian with its bolshy nonsense and kindergarten spelling mistakes. I especially enjoy the impartiality of the Sun, but maybe that is because of page three. Let us not forget the conservative bent of NBC and its impartial freikorps mouthpiece MSNBC, which are probably calculated Goebbelsesque distractions to dupe us into missing the Burchy intentions of its corporate overlords. And let us not forget the hard work done by NPR to expose that John Edwards really was a bigger scumbag than we all thought he was already—wait, that was the National Enquirer. Markets give people what they want, and if the people want trash then they get it. Too bad intellectuals are so infatuated with their own superiority that they distain what people want in favour of what they benevolently think is best for them (you know the little people, who really should be forced to consume all the crap by produced by the BBC for the sake of a television license). Media markets reflect what people want, and fie on the snots who look down upon that.
"Almost every study done on the subject shows regular NPR listeners are more educated and more informed then their broadcast media cohorts."
Too bad we can't bottle all that unbounded arrogance the dear dr. spews out. Might be able to turn it gas and fill up our SUV's. You gonna defend this study on NPR listeners as thoroughly as the Picketty/Saenz study Russ Roberts challenged you to defend a few weeks ago? Oh that's right we're still waiting for that dissertation.
Almost every study done on the subject shows regular NPR listeners are more educated and more informed then their broadcast media cohorts. So your just talking crap and non-sense.
Yes, but you cannot deny that the infobabes on FNC are Aych Oh Tee HOT and that is what counts. More than grammar, Mr. Edumacated.
Can you believe that? An utter oxymoron. Somewhere in the minds of Bill Moyer and presumbably muirgeo, it makes sense to have the government fund dissent!
Unbelievable.
Posted by: Marcus
If the government is funding dissent against itself that truly is a great thing. That's called a check and balance system. When it funds propaganda that's called pushing conformity… not good. A true democracy should be rife with dissent and politicians kept on their toes and regularly replaced from their service if the slightest bit inept or corrupt.
Of course we've seen the right wing politicians and their cronies attempt to take over the board of NPR.
From now on, it is my policy to encourage and abet dissent against myself. I will be funding it with your money. It is all done in your interest. Trust me;-) Since I have labeled myself a liberal, you don't have to worry about me or my cronies. Me and my cronies are from the left-wing, you see.
Oil speculation. Interestingly tons of money flowed OUT of the markets shortly after the Senate Commerce Committee met to pass reform.
Thank you very much Senate Commerce Committee. You've saved Americans ( even the Libertopians) billions of dollars on gas with out drilling a single new well. Now that's good governance.
Michael Greenberger former CFTC Chairman's testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee.
Of course the current CFTC boards study says the dat is too opaque to make any conclusions on.
>>So your just talking crap and non-sense. ~ muirgeo<<
Justs can talk and can be owned [assuming you forgot the word "is" between the words "just" and "talking"]? Nonsense! I hear that pots can talk, though…they chat it up with kettles quite frequently.
>>Tabloid journalism is the results of "free-market corporate journalism". The fact that this stuff is what sells best in such a system is just one clue to the potential failures of markets.<<
Muirgeo, you are one of the buyers here. You can claim that you get all your news from NPR and public television but in the end, you repeat most of the same garbage that corporate/tabloid journalism produces. You, doctor, are one of the very people that you earlier criticized for some sort of failure in the market. Physician heal thyself!
Muirgeo states:
"The public news media is a great example of an area where the public system is more effecient then the private one."
How?
Please be specific in your explanation.
NPR makes plenty of errors. Most recent is this the initial claim that
Estonia broke free of communism in 1991.
Estonia was independent from 1920 to 1940.
NPR has botched the name of the Russian president as well as getting the year wrong when referring to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
NPR makes errors too…
Muirgeo,
"At least if you listen to NPR you'd understand how regularly your being ripped off by the "free market"."
We're not being ripped off by the free market. It is your favored fascist market that has allowed no alternative to gas guzzling autos and cities buried in multilane concrete. Your fascist market that directs 30 to 40 percent of people's earnings to things they didn't ask for and don't want. Your fascist market that stifles creativity and innovation in healthcare, education, finance, and yes, the media.
And by the way, Muirgeo, it isn't possible to be ripped off by a free market. Its a contradiction in terms. The presence of people being ripped off is an indicator of political activity, as politics is, in essence, the art of ripping people off.
Quote from muirgeo: "Trust me …"
The typical words of all would be dictators.
NPR is painfully politically correct (vacuously ass kissing). I listened yesterday to yet another story on "race" only long enough to switch it off. Its "journalists" hate their jobs so much that they try to become game show hosts instead.
This web site and thousands like it are the private media now, and it'll deliver some sort of revolution yet.
Interestingly, tons of money flowed OUT of the oil market shortly after the Bush administration stopped violently rattling its worn out sabers at Iran and started talking to them instead. Were speculators responsible? Sure they were. Should the price of oil rise specuatively when madly megalomanical statesmen threaten critical oil supplies? Of course, it should.
Has Congress actually enacted any reforms? I doubt it. Can Congress actually do anything to prevent speculative trading of oil futures in London markets? No. Since these speculators are not subject to Congress, do they much care about the grandiose speeches of U.S. politicians in an election year? No.
Muirgeo stated:
"The public news media is a great example of an area where the public system is more efficient then the private one."
If you refer to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting it isn't, wasn't, and has never been particularly efficient (interesting measures for that in news broadcasting by the way). The statement indicates that Mr. Muirgeo knows very little about the news media industry.
The original point of the post– about the press digging into personal dirt on political candidates vs. actual office holders– is a question of… wait for it… professional media ethics.
It's a shame the topic strayed so far afield.
If the government is funding dissent against itself that truly is a great thing. That's called a check and balance system.
God, I love comedy in the morning!
Interestingly tons of money flowed OUT of the markets shortly after the Senate Commerce Committee met to pass reform.
Obviously, not a spurious correlation at all. The proof of cause and effect is the correlation itself. I think I now understand why hedge funds got there asses kicked when volatility spiked – they all hired Muirdiots to manage risk.
Has Congress actually enacted any reforms? I doubt it. Can Congress actually do anything to prevent speculative trading of oil futures in London markets? No. Since these speculators are not subject to Congress, do they much care about the grandiose speeches of U.S. politicians in an election year? No.
Posted by: Martin Brock
Martin I suggest you listen to the Michael Greenberger testimony I linked to and listen to this as well.
The second is by Kieth Olbermann but listen to the thing and criticize the points and facts stated not the commentator.
Some how we have to shut don the revolving door that rotates regulators, lobbyist, politicians and CEO's to run our corporatist country.
But the big point is that when good legislation and regulation is in place IT WORKS. The Enrons of the world are not the exception but the rule. And a corporations CEO has by duty to pursue every aspect of profit and that includes lobbying congress for favors and rules changes.
Absolutely amazing the the CFTC chair deregulated the energy market then took a job with Enron. This is where the outrage in over our system should be and the answer is not to simply take power away from the government and to deregulate the system. Enron, the housing bubble and the gas speculation are the prices of deregulation. The answer involves far more oversite over politicians as well as over lobbyist, regulators and CEO's.
Until then you all can pretend the market is getting along in spite of regulation when in fact it has gotten along because of good regulation and is now collapsed with out it. The deregulatory trends and laws that changed over the last 30 years are clear as the results we now see splattered all before… hey has Lehman folded yet… or did the government fill it's beggar tin cup yet? Hopefully Richard Fuld has got him some good blind beggar sunglasses. I haven't checked the news to see the latest deregulatory shoe drop.
Obviously, not a spurious correlation at all. The proof of cause and effect is the correlation itself. I think I now understand why hedge funds got there asses kicked when volatility spiked – they all hired Muirdiots to manage risk.
Posted by: Methinks
Talk about comedy in the morning… mentioning hedge funds and "managing risk" in the same sentence…NOW THAT's FUNNY.. what a bunch of billion dollar used car salemen.
“But the big point is that when good legislation and regulation is in place IT WORKS.”
You mean like Russia or China? hmmmmm…. just not seeing the Utopia.
Absolutely amazing the the CFTC chair deregulated the energy market then took a job with Enron.
Except that the energy market in CA was NOT deregulated.
Until you get that, your intellectual honesty is in grave doubt.
You mean like Russia or China? hmmmmm…. just not seeing the Utopia.
Posted by: John Smith
John come on now. You are seeing the collapse of our markets after 30 years of deregulatory policies that didn't happen the prior 40 years while those regulations were in place.
I'm comparing apples to apples. You want to bring in communist Russia to tell me about how apples work better then watermelons.
Come on we're all adults here … lets act like it.
the doubts about his intellectual honesty pale in comparison to the doubts about his intelligence quotient.