Good piece on Current TV from Douglas Rushkoff weblog

[BlueEyedSon]

(snip)
Then, from what I can tell, the opportunity arose to buy a cable TV channel. And then focus shifted a bit towards raising the money, making the deal, and becoming a real cable channel. And I'm sure there are realities to all this that are far beyond what I can imagine. I've never raised money, never done a multi-million-dollar project, never had to deal with investors. But television is a powerful force - a powerful medium. A very strong flavor to bring into the recipe.

But it's also *last* century's big medium. It's not the best platform for a participatory media movement. And so the priorities of the project, understandably, shifted to the priorities of TV: looking cool, creating an aspirational culture, and so on.

On the first broadcast day, one of the hosts said it all: "send us your tapes, and if we think it's cool and relevant, we'll put it on the air." If *they* think so. Because they're the arbiters of cool and relevant. And who are "they"? Former programming executives from other TV stations.

I like Al Gore, and I like most of the people I know who are over at Current. They are well-meaning, and they are not dumb. But cable television is not the place to launch the great interactive media experiment for the 21st Century. The great cable TV revolution already happened with CNN and MTV. Those were the watershed cable innovations, along with payTV channels like HBO. It already happened.
(snip)

http://www.rushkoff.com/2005/08/current-tv.php

[zalinda]

1. But, you can also

send in tapes with a liberal slant, no matter what it is. If anyone has anything to say, this is the platform.

zalidna