Good coverage, HB.
Yeah, having watched the Ch.17 forum, Decelle's logic is a bit....hard to digest. But, he is also conflating the two entities: as per the Ch.17 forum, he knows vets who have seen AJ in the Middle East and he believes its presentation is anti-American. But does that mean AJE is the same here? I don't drink Miller beer because its owned by Phillip Morris/Altria. Are they the same company, or should they be considered individually? Buying Miller beer supports (financially) Phillip Morris, so I don't buy Miller beer. Does watching AJE indicate support for AJ, which may be more biased (or, may not be)?

AJE is a product of AJ. Its an interesting question: are we supporting all of it because we want to support some of it? The fact that there appears to be no $$ involved, the question becomes perhaps a bit more philosophical than material.

I do like the suggestions that BT make an effort to include more programing from various voices/groups. And if that happens, than the inclusion of AJE will have served perhaps a greater purpose than just that of an existential importance.

 

Good thoughts, Senator.

By the way, did you know Phillip Morris/Altria is the top performing stock of all time and the only one Ben Bernake owns?

Cough cough.

 

Jesus, I hope that's not true. But, if he's a smoker, then I guess he'd have fewer qualms...in theory.

The worst past of Altria (for me, anyway), is that they own ~30% of SABMiller: Miller joined with SAB (South African Brewing) to form a GIANT company that now owns Pilsner Uruqell...my formerly favorite beer. Luckily I found a nice, American made alternative: Prima Pils ). Small brew pub in PA makes it (Victory Brewing). Great stuff, although not distributed in VT. Some good news tho: Altria no longer owns Kraft. Why is that a big deal? Poke around and see all the food companies that Kraft does or did own: scary.

But I digress...
Whats perhaps the most concerning aspect of the AJE/BT dust-up is the blatant and unapologetic emotional and irrational reasoning being employed by those wanting AJE to go away. There is soooooo much offensive, mindless, ignorance-inspiring, violence-inducing bullshit on TV already, and these people seem oblivious to that. What perhaps is more intriguing however, is the FEAR their opinion seems to unmask. If AJE is on TV, then what? We all hate Jews? We're going to sudently hate America? We all hate Israel, instantly? Where are their backbones?? Are these people just slaves to television? Stand up for yourselves and turn the goddamned thing off!!! Honestly, people are afraid of the television....its remarkable.
I know Paul. Paul is a decent guy. Paul is doing a good job representing his people and doing what he thinks is best. For that, he bears no fault. And he has every single right to have something changed that he and those he represents believe to be bad thing. I just think the logic applied here is missing some key ingredients.

 

Councilor Decelles being a good or bad guy is irrelevant. The issue is that he is a public figure, a ward representative- and cannot even distinguish conceptually between free access to information and what he sees as his loyalty to veterans. soldiers take the oath to support our liberties, rights constitutional or otherwise. simple- and i think that Councilor Decelles might do well to , just for once , put the partisan, one-view-only approach to all things arab/muslim aside and realize that his venerated constituancy is not the only one in this town who's opinion is not only valid but "good for business".

 

Its very relevant that Paul is a good guy. And its important that someone who disagrees with his point (ME!) makes it clear that I believe he's a good guy, despite the disagreement. Otherwise, ideas are conflated for identities and suddenly Paul Decelles is considered a bad person because we disagree with his position. It happens all the time, and we all know it happens all the time.

What is also important to understand is that many in Paul's ward feel under represented by city gov't. Yeah, the NNE is a bit more conservative-leaning. But it's also a pretty important tax-base. My sense is Paul and those he represents are concerned because they ARE a minority in Burlington, at least in the voting booth. It might not be "hip" to vote Right, but its still legal, last time I checked.

Remember, as the rather famous Charles Taylor reminds us, "liberalism is a fighting creed." There is no neutrality. Hegemony can come from anywhere, the Left included. Before condemning Paul, let's remember he's not the only voice opposing AJE.

 

Paul is a good guy. I voted for him in March.

 

the only voice? hardly, if he was, this whole situation might be relegated to the misjudgement or bon mot of a misinformed burlington politico- but unfortunately for him, Decelles has defacto become a public representative of this point of view, and this will in turn put him in "flak's way". sorry- that's going to happen no matter what side of the political fence you represent, left, right or otherwise- right haik? you got hit with a stick just writing a few words of poetic liscence a few blog posts ago.

to infer(imply? ) that i somehow mean to represent paul as "not nice" by not caring whether or not he is "nice" is really some heavy logic/semantical hurdle-jumping i see no need to engage in. I don't mean i don't care about him or his character- i just don't want to enter it in as evidence about this issue one way or the other.

i don't consider it relevant because i'm not here discussing paul's character; i'm discussing his public desicion as a city councilman to support a certain point of view i disagree with. for me to have a bias against someone's character because they have a viewpoint i don't agree with would be rather stupid and rude. I just want to stay with the debate- not character assessments. i don't "care" about Mr. Decelles' niceness; i care about his opinions, his statements (public official) and his ability to represent and possibly influence the impending desicion regarding AJE. that's it- nothing more. is he a nice guy? of course he's a nice guy- why would anyone want to assume anything else? gimme a break, i may be passionate about this issue, but i'm not callous or rude. i'm glad you have personal relationships with folks you don't agree with politically or ethically- so do i! i just don't see that part of your statement to be more muddying the issue than productive.

"...It might not be "hip" to vote Right, but its still legal, last time I checked. "

well, thanks for the clarification-but really, a totally unecessary jump to conclusions. if i understand your glibness; you mean to say that "the citizens(right wing) in paul's ward have a right to be heard and considered as to their opinion on AJE and they are or they might be an important fiscal loss for BT if they should choose to not be BT subscribers over AJE programming", is that right?

unfortunately it still has no bearing on my questioning Decelles' thinking that being "loyal to vets" requires him to not support the totality of citizens need or want or right to AJE or any other "unpopular" programming! it has no bearing on questioning the troubling notion that those he is in agreement with feel they can stop all of us from having a culture/news source on a public telecom they don't like. it's not about who's hip or not- it's about censoring culture and information on a municipal utility.

i don't want to slight the "other side". i don't want to piss anyone off- but to be honest i didn't start this incendiary nonsense. and if a group wants to try and lord it over others and push their point of view OVER mine or anyone elses- then sorry, the fight is on, as far as i'm concerned. they can't have it both ways. can't imply that by supporting people's right to AJE that i'm somehow "not supporting the troops" (hate that meme) , or want BT to financially wither and then hide behind momma's skirts claiming, "hey we just have a desenting opinion!! we have rights too!" feh.

let's try to remember that all the factions who see fit to censor AJE COULD have been less reactionary and less xenophobic. they could have demanded the inclusion of pro-israeli, pro-iraq war programming... as well as armed forces television/voice of america programming. they could have demanded a level playing field; they could have chosen to play ball publically and not support an underhanded approach like burns' first way of handling the problem- then defending the desicion with red herrings like "subscriber revenue" to make it appear rational on live television! they chose different tactics. their choice, not mine.

please, don't allow my brusqueness to be taken as anything more than my passion and my personal desire to just stick to the issues- nothing more. i'm a snarky guy at times and apologize if i may have led you to think i was attacking your friend.

 

"Everybody has their reasons," as good ol' Jean Renoir said.

In your next to last paragraph, flameape, lot's of coulda-shoulda-woulda's, but I agree with you. The Israel Centre of Vermont and the reform rabbi in S Burlington are full of inflammatory and vindictive language and they just don't care about alternative solutions (as you proposed). Only their way counts. They are inherently anti-Muslim and anti-Arab. Obnoxious to me, considering they are people of faith (as am I). At the meeting the other night (HB notes I spoke), I concluded my remarks by calling for that committee to question Burns' actions and reprimand him. None of the speakers had brought this up. There was, however, wild applause from the audience when I made that point. What's needed in all city departments is more accountability, none of this sweeping under the rug because the guy is really nice (that's how the Leopold/Pacy voting machine illegalities were handled).

Mr Nice Guy Paul can make all the comments he wants about offence to vets, but he's also a canny politician and a free marketeer (probably the most conservative Republican on the council in the most conservative wards) and really wants the demise of BT. Offense to vets is a red herring.

Some people did suggest a more diverse program offering (LBGT, feminist, more cultural stuff). That would be welcomed, I think. Surely it would be better than the corporatist/consumer crap, the infomercial/infotainment stuff that's presented as news.

 

Flame,

Let me clarify a bit. I'm not suggesting that knowing Paul, or even liking Paul means that his opinion is somehow more valid. Not at all. Nor do I suggest that you specifically are painting him as a bad. guy. I was making a point that we ALL need to be careful not to do so, because it happens when we're not paying attention. I meant it as a more universal than personal comment.

The ward's financial contribution to BT is less important than their overall contribution to the city's tax-base. And while BT is claiming no tax burden, it is a public entity. So, there's at least a "hey this is our city too" concern (I'm guessing).

And yeah, I agree: the vet reasoning doesn't hold much water. Philosophically, vets and free speech can be considered in the exact opposite way that Paul has presented.

Yup, people should have thought through things a bit more and been less reactionary, agreed.

But, let me reiterate: the reason I mention that Paul is a nice guy (read: I don't assume bad intentions on his part) is that while a few people here can take the intellectual high-road and distinguish between character and political position, I doubt the same is true of alot of people. Thus, I find it important--and yes, relevant--to make such a point.

Anywho, we're on the same page here.

 

yeh we are on the same page in the end-i won't forget that. i think this subject has me too damn riled up! but rather be riled up over something important than new lindsay lohan scandals (i mentioned lohan, haik, so that your google and technorati hits would go up). thanks for your explanation and all of you for being committed to this cause.

 

I'll try to do you one better....(see name)

This is an important issue, and it's good to see people taking it seriously. Although I feel slightly a little self-conscious because I no longer live in B'town, but my concern for the city has not wavered despite the displacement. Haik's work here is really, really important and so I'm more than happy to try to lend a (more often than not) supporting voice.

Rock on.

 

i didn't know Lindsay Lohan's boobs lived in Burlington!! Now I wonder...If Lindsay Lohan's boobs were a reporter for AJE- would it be any LESS objectionable to these alleged vets or any other groups out there? Ludicrous? Yes. But still... given that in its heyday boob-tastic syndicated TV show, BAYWATCH was for most of its tenure one of the top rated shows in Israel, could hot babes be connected to bridging world peace ? Imagine a sort of "NAKED AL JAZEERA ENGLISH"; "the naked truth from beyond the VEIL..."

or, not- i'm just sayin.

 

I completely support your train of thought here. Moreover, I'll defend to the death your right to find out if boobs are the answer for world peace. As long as I can get a gig as an intern....

 

I wonder if lobbyists in Burlington keep pace with the dynamics of the transnational media & audiences?

The fact that (in ealy 2007 as the once Israeli Deputy Premier) Shimon Peres would set aside some time to visit the headquarters of Aljazeera News Channel in Doha will not surprise observers of the region's media scene. Peres also appeared in an special interview on the 24 hour news channel launched only in November 2006.

The attention and engagement accorded to AJ belies and dismisses what some alarmists portrayed to regarding this new channel with a multi-dimensional perspective to current affairs.

Shimon Peres' 2007 visit to the headquarters of Aljazeera News Channel in Doha would have shocked those oblivious to the region's media scene. In recent years, a dynamic transnational media has emerged that interacts with an engaging and critical audience that makes its own choices to reach its own conclusions. Peres endorsed the need to communicate with a sizeable audience by appearing in an interview programme on this news channel established recently.

The attention and engagement accorded to AJ sends a message on how seriously the newly established channel is taken by important regional players.

An Italian scholar of the Arab media, Donatella della Ratta rightly suggests that the West should seriously consider before blaming or blocking channels like Aljazeera that are in fact educating tools to inform rather than a medium providing an embedded version from a warring side. Her analysis is a wake-up call for those who believe that pouring $62 million on Al-Hurra can make the US image right in the Middle-East.

Instead of making wrong choices and pursuing wrong approaches that are just goose-chasing and witch-hunting exercises US needs to befriend with the ones that capture and portray the facts professionally and far effectively. The fact that Peres made it a point to appear on the channel reflects the significance of reaching out to an audience genuinely interested for peace in the region. This leaves cynics on the wrong foot when it comes to the realities of the Middle East.

It is an hour of reckoning for critics to come out from his age of denial, dismissal and disapproval of those he dislikes and differs with. Another factor that merits due consideration is what the viewers in Israel prefer to see. BBC World has been dropped by Israel's satellite provider Yes TV in favor of the Al-Jazeera English. The Guardian, London dubbed it as 'the first major distribution blow the corporation's international news channel has suffered since al-Jazeera's English-language service began broadcasting'. Although BBC World will still be available in Israel via cable, it will lose around 50% of its audience in the country as a result of being dropped by Yes. Al-Jazeera English signed the carriage deal with Yes in November 2006, but the damaging consequences for BBC World have only just emerged, remarked media commentator Tara Conlan. The true proof of responsible activism is in promoting and not preventing pluralistic viewpoints.

Alternative and accountable media is what the global audiences deserve and watch groups should put their energies to ensure the availability of such options.

 

http://fretemplatesblog.blogspot.com