How We Value the Super-Rich - Wall Street vs. Silicon Valley

Re:How We Value the Super-Rich - Wall Street vs. Silicon Valley by jmtame on Sunday September 28, 2008 @04:06PM (#317801)

Ha! That is true. I should have said what happens if you take all the regulation out of a football game. I was trying to emphasize the point that deregulation (or taking away neutrality rules) is bad and will allow larger media companies free reign to do whatever they want. With that much power, they're bound to exert absolute control over the whole system.

The idea of regulation is not to stifle younger, newer innovators. It's to prevent the larger players from taking over and locking out competition. At one point, it was illegal to own more than 40 TV stations.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How We Value the Super-Rich - Wall Street vs. Silicon Valley by anamax on Sunday September 28, 2008 @06:29PM (#317877)

It's always a bad idea to confuse intent with effect.

I've no doubt that fans of regulation want good things. However, the result of said regulation rarely matches those intentions.

Not to go all Dr. Phil, but insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly, expecting a different result.

Media control regulations lock in big media. Note that we didn't even get a fourth network until TV started to lose marketshare. (Yes, no one owned more than 40 stations, but that restriction didn't affect media control.)

[ Parent | on HN ]