1) I think the issue would not have won the attention it has if students
had not rebelled against the ad.
2) In a narrow sphere in which I am deeply interested, there are 5,000
radio stations available to the other side. There are 50, i.e., 1 for
every 100 of the former, carrying the best our side has to offer,
"Democracy Now." Therefore I see no reason to waste the precious air
time of the five Pacifica stations supposedly on our side to "balance"
arguments. 100 to 1 is hardly balance.
Bill Mandel
Marty Jezer wrote:
>
> William Mandel wrote:
> > So you conclude that the Horowitzes should always be entitled to more
> > ink than us, since they will always be able to buy more advertising
> > space. Is that correct?
> > William Mandel
>
> That's an easy question to ask, Bill, not so easy to answer.
>
> Yes, it's true, their side has more money than our side; more money for
> advertisements, more money for lobbying, more money for campaign
> contributions, more money for public relations, more money even to bus
> people to Washington for demonstrations. Is your idea that our side, the
> poor minority, censor their side, keep them from advertising?
>
>
===================================================================
Do you teach in the social sciences? Consider my SAYING NO TO POWER
(Creative Arts, Berkeley, 1999), for course use. It was written as a
social history of
the U.S. for the past three-quarters of a century through the eyes of a
participant
observer in most progressive social movements (I'm 83), and of the USSR
from the
standpoint of a Sovietologist (five earlier books) knowing that country
longer than any
other in the profession. Therefore it is also a history of the Cold War.
Positive reviews
in The Black Scholar, American Studies in Scandinavia, San Francisco
Chronicle,
forthcoming in Tikkun, etc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 06 2001 - 01:11:59 EDT