Comment by rkalla | Hacker News Reader

Comment by rkalla | Hacker News Reader

For folks more in-the-know than me on govt/corp history, does the power struggle between the people and controlling entities (wether it be the govt or the corps as we are seeing more recently) ebb and flow? Is this an ebb in out history where we see the balance of power pouring to the corp side of the scale or is this an unprecedented moment in history where we see control in health care, research, internet, communications, news, newspaper/magazine, popular culture (TV shows, Disney-created properties, modern fads, etc.), food, etc. all primarily dictated by corporations?

I'll do my part to pledge money for this movie because I think it is important to shine as much light as possible into dark corners... the lack of light allows nasty things to grow it seems, but I also (unfortunately) have no expectations that any change will come out of this as a result.

It seems like we have more information about corruptions and injustices now than we ever have in the history of the world; whether it is too overwhelming or "just not bad enough to care", the result of things mostly staying the same and going down the same path seem to continue.

Either things aren't as bad/terrible/horrifying as movies like Lose Change and Zeitgeist make them out to be or we (humans) are extremely difficult to mobilize as a group.

I really don't know how to think about gross imbalances of power. You see it so much it doesn't surprise you any more, but you still hate it, but I'm also very busy so I'm not running out with signs to stand on corners trying to get people to change their minds.

Anyone have more valuable thoughts on this to help put this in perspective? I'd appreciate it.

Since about the mid 1970s deregulation has been consistent. This empowers corporations to sort of do whatever they want so long as the free market justifies their behaviour. The point of view that regulation is a bad thing, and de-regulation is a good thing, has become increasingly popular, even being taught in schools.

In a publicly traded company it's practically illegal not to seek out any unfair or immoral advantage that may increase your share value. Being moral is not often in the best interest of your investors, at least not in the short term.

If you accept this as truth, then it kind of makes sense that large corporations lobby various governments to pass bills that directly or indirectly increase their share value regardless of the consequences. This is so profitable that over time this leads to massive deregulation and government corruption as companies try anything and everything to influence government leaders (or put their own people in these influencial positions). It's pretty blatent and not uncommon for a regulator later taking a job with a large corporation they were in charge of overseeing. In some fields it's an accepted and commonly known career path.

So I wouldn't say it's us against them or anything crazy. It just so happens that the interests of most corporations do not align with society in general's long term interests.

The problem with regulation is that it's subject to corruption than can produce fairly large consequences for society. It usually takes a while before a government body has been properly infiltrated (say 15 years or so?).

The problem with deregulation is it assumes corporation interests are often aligned with societies interests. That's simply not true the majority of the time.

Hi rkalla:

Thanks very much for your contribution to the production of #killswitch the documentary.

You're right, there is a lot corruption and sometimes it's difficult to make sense of it all.

In my opinion the most alarming part of all is the unprecedented corruption and concentration of the traditional media.

You can really get a sense of how corrupt and concentrated the media industry is when you check out these ownership charts on FreePress.com... You'd be amazed at how many television stations, Film Production Studios, Magazines, Online, holdings, etc. a company like General Electric or Walt Disney owns.

Here's the charts: http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart/main

Once you realize how much control over knowledge and information these six companies have and how few people in the US get their news outside of these six sources you realize we've got a major problem for a functioning democracy.

Now that these companies are threatening the integrity of the Internet (NBC-Comcast Merger)... Wait to see which major media conglomerate will be the next to merge with a major ISP... it's quite possible that in the not so distant future the Internet will look like super-charged cable T.V.

A couple of books on the topic: "The Master Switch" by Tim Wu, and "The Creation of the Media", by Paul Starr.

"The Master Switch" goes through the history of radio, where an initial period of experimentation was stifled by regulation, with big business (the large networks) being the major beneficiary; the two weren't necessarily opposed.

On the other hand, the former will show you that eliminating regulation doesn't necessarily eliminate the problem. In the absence of effective regulation in the 19th century, Western Union seized an effective monopoly on telegraphy. Having done that, they then made a deal for cut rates with the Associated Press whereby AP-affiliated newspapers (effectively, any paper that wanted to cover national stories) were forbidden to editorialize against the monopoly.

Hi rst:

You're right, "Master Switch" is a great book. It has influenced me in the writing of #killswitch.

Link to #killswitch project: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/akorn/killswitch-a-docum...

I have not read "The Creation of the Media", by Paul Starr. What can you tell me about that book?

In some sense they have less power today than they ever had - imagine the outcry if some senator raped a commoner today. Compare that with what would have happened if a lord raped a peasant 800 years ago. It is likely that the peasant would have been killed for insulting the lord.

On the other hand, modern technology has done much to erode privacy for the common people and since information is power, some of the lost power has been returned to the rulers.

What is really exciting is the future - I am not at all convinced that the current nation states can survive in their present form when they loose the ability to tax their most productive citizens (since more and more work can be done overseas) as much as they have done and when something like bitcoin can and will be used to do transactions between people.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com