        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        
                      IS THIS AN UNTAMPERED FILE?
        
        This ASCII-file version of Imprimis, On Line was
        packaged by Applied Foresight, Inc. (AFI hereafter).
        Every AFI-packaged ASCII version of Imprimis is
        distributed in either an "-AV protected" ZIP file
        format or a SDN (Shareware Distributors Network)
        protected SDN file.
        
        "AV" is the authenticity verification feature provided
        to registered PKZIP users, which Applied Foresight,
        Inc., is.  If you are using the MS-DOS PKUNZIP.EXE
        program written by PKWARE Inc. and do not see the "-AV"
        message after every file is unzipped AND receive the
        message "Authentic files Verified! #JAA646 Applied
        Foresight Inc." when you unzip this file then do not
        trust it's integrity. If your version of PKUNZIP is not
        the PKWARE-authored program (for instance, you are
        running a non-MS-DOS version), then this message may
        not be displayed. (Note: version 2.04g of PKZIP was
        used to create this authentication message.)
        
        SDN is the major distributor of Shareware and
        Copyrighted Freeware and users who extract files from
        an SDN file with the current version of the archive
        utility ARJ, should see:
        
               *** Valid ARJ-SECURITY envelope signature:
               *** SDN International(sm) SDN#01 R#2417
        
        This file is an SDN International(sm) Author-Direct
        Distribution. It should be verified for the SDN
        Security Seal by the FileTest utility available at The
        SDN Project AuthorLine BBS 203-634-0370.
        
        (Note: prior to about May, 1993, SDN used PAK to
        archive its distributions and its authenticity message
        differs from the above.)
        
        Trust only genuine AFI-packaged archives ...  anything
        else may be just that: ANYTHING ELSE.
        
        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        
                           Imprimis, On Line
                             December, 1994
        
        IMPRIMIS (im-pri-mis), taking its name from the Latin
        term, "in the first place," is the publication of
        Hillsdale College. Executive Editor, Ronald L.
        Trowbridge; Managing Editor, Lissa Roche; Assistant,
        Patricia A. DuBois. Illustrations by Tom Curtis. The
        opinions expressed in IMPRIMIS may be, but are not
        necessarily, the views of Hillsdale College and its
        External Programs division. Copyright 1994. Permission
        to reprint in whole or part is hereby granted, provided
        a version of the following credit line is used:
        "Reprinted by permission from IMPRIMIS, the monthly
        journal of Hillsdale College." Subscription free upon
        request. ISSN 0277-8432. Circulation 565,000 worldwide,
        established 1972. IMPRIMIS trademark registered in U.S.
        Patent and Trade Office #1563325.
        
             ---------------------------------------------
        
                           Volume 23, No. 12
              Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan 49242
                             December 1994
        
             ---------------------------------------------
        
                         "The Media Revolution"
                              by John Fund
                 Editorial Writer, Wall Street Journal
        
             ---------------------------------------------
        
        Preview: A "new," liberating force is revolutionizing
        the American media: competition. For years, the three
        major television networks and a handful of newspapers,
        radio programs, and magazines have dominated the
        information business. But, as Wall Street Journal
        editorialist John Fund argues here, millions of people
        are now turning to alternative news sources. The media
        gatekeepers can no longer control what gets into the
        news or how it will be presented. That's good news for
        the news, Fund says, and for our nation.
        
             ---------------------------------------------
        
        In George Orwell's chilling novel 1984, the state
        attempts to control citizens through two-way
        "telescreens" in their homes that bombard them with
        propaganda and monitor their every move and spoken
        word. Since his novel was published in the 1940s, many
        people have worried that technology would allow
        governments unprecedented power over their citizens.
        Was Orwell a prophet, they wondered?
        
             Well, we now know that Orwell was wrong, and
        spectacularly so. He was wrong not about the nature of
        totalitarianism--he was perhaps its sharpest and most
        vivid critic--but about the role technology would play
        in the future. In the "Information Age," it has proven
        to be a liberating force.
        
             Technology and the information it conveys directly
        contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union, as
        Scott Shane documents in Dismantling Utopia: "The new
        technology turned out to include weapons the citizen
        could wield against the state as readily as the state
        could use them on the citizen." He adds that once
        Gorbachev was compelled to allow citizens access to
        information, "the forbidden fruit soon swept across
        Soviet existence, touching every nook of daily life,
        battering hoary myths and lies, and ultimately eroding
        the foundations of Soviet power."
        
             New technology is also reshaping and empowering
        citizens in the Western democracies. Walter Wriston,
        the former chairman of Citibank, argues that "the
        Information Age is rapidly giving power to the people"
        and "driving nation-states toward cooperation with each
        other so that the world's work can get done."
        
             Nowhere is the Information Age having a more
        profound effect than here in the United States. Here,
        the flow of information is more free than anywhere
        else. But American journalists still have a protected
        status--a kind of diplomatic immunity, if you will--
        courtesy of the First Amendment. While they favor and
        even agitate for regulation of every other industry,
        journalists insist that there is no such thing as
        "reasonable regulation" of the media. Government
        meddling in the media always makes matters worse. It
        deprives the public of vital information, stifles
        debate, and intimidates and punishes political enemies.
        
             The fact that journalists regard their freedom as
        sacrosanct was brought home to me quite forcibly a few
        years ago when I addressed a group of distinguished
        journalists at a national conference. I announced at
        the beginning of my speech that they should take out
        their notebooks, because I was going to give them a
        scoop; I was going to tell them about an industry in
        their country that consistently exploits its work
        force--an industry that receives very little scrutiny
        and that often tries to keep its dirty laundry out of
        the news.
        
             It is an industry that heavily relies on child
        labor. Boys and girls as young as ten years of age are
        forced to rise at five o'clock in the morning to go to
        work. Heavy loads are deposited on their doorsteps.
        They have to fold each item and put it in bags, which
        they must haul on bicycles throughout the neighborhood.
        And they have to deliver each item unerringly to its
        specific destination. They must do this in all kinds of
        weather, often enduring heat, cold, rain, and snow.
        They face potentially dangerous hazards: traffic,
        biting dogs, strangers who might do them harm. For all
        this difficult work, they are paid far less than the
        minimum wage--pennies per item.
        
             Most of the journalists stopped scribbling before
        I finished my speech. They correctly guessed that I was
        describing the newspaper industry and that the
        exploited child laborers were paper boys and girls.
        They were outraged; though these jour-nalists are vocal
        advocates of child labor laws when applied to other
        industries, they demand that their industry should
        remain exempt. The courts have bowed to journalists on
        this issue, accepting the curious argument that the
        First Amendment would be abridged if children could not
        be employed to deliver newspapers.
        
        
                  The Demise of the Media Gatekeepers
        
        The media, of course, demands exemption from all kinds
        of regulation, not just child labor laws. We
        journalists are experts at convincing others that we
        are providing a highly valuable service and that we are
        the watchdogs of society. As Chicago Tribune columnist
        Stephen Chapman points out, journalists self-
        righteously claim that their occupation champions
        truth, enlightens an uninformed citizenry, and is
        somehow more "noble" than other occupations.
        "Journalists believe other industries provide their
        customers with what they want. We journalists believe
        we fulfill needs. The trouble is, we don't know for
        certain what people need. We only know what we think
        they need," he concludes.
        
             To some extent, this media arrogance is
        understandable. The media has had a very real power
        that does distinguish it from other industries. For
        years it has been in the position of deciding what is
        important for its
        
        customers to know. But all that is changing in the
        1990s. We are living through not just an information
        revolution, but a media revolution. Increasing
        competition is forcing more and more media outlets to
        take account of the demands of consumers of the news.
        Like big government, big business and big labor, big
        media is at last learning about the real world of the
        free market.
        
             Once it was possible for the "media gatekeepers"
        to control the flow of information to the American
        people. Once a handful of national publications and
        three major networks filtered the news and set the
        parameters of political debate. But rival information
        networks have sprung up everywhere in the 1990s. We are
        on the verge of having 500-channel cable systems, and
        desktop publishing makes it possible to deliver
        information to hundreds of niche markets. Five million
        Americans have satellite dishes. In 1988, there were
        200 radio talk shows. Now there are a thousand such
        programs. Rush Limbaugh has a weekly audience of 20
        million people. One out of every six Americans is a
        regular listener to talk radio. One listener says,
        "Talk radio is a response to an elitist, biased and
        out-of-touch media.
        
             People who never had a say in any political arena
        can now call in and be heard."
        
             Electronic "town halls" and computer bulletin
        boards are also an increasing source of information. A
        single computer network, Internet, receives more than
        three million calls a day. It features 5,000 electronic
        discussion groups and 2,500 electronic newsletters 24
        hours a day. Once you have a personal computer--and a
        third of Americans now do--and a telephone modem, it
        costs $10 a month to subscribe--that is how much the
        cost of this new information technology is being driven
        down by competition.
        
             Other kinds of new information technology have
        helped ordinary citizens bypass the media gatekeepers.
        In February of 1994, for example, an amendment was
        added at the last minute to a major education bill
        pending in Congress. It would have effectively required
        private school teachers and the parents of home
        schoolers in every state to be certified by the
        government.
        
             The major media outlets were completely
        uninterested in covering this story, even though one
        million American families now engage in home schooling.
        Nor were they moved by the fact that the amendment
        would have been an unprecedented assault on the nature
        of private education and individual freedom in America.
        But a few private school and home school groups did try
        to get the word out. They reached 200,000 individuals
        through fax and telephone "trees" in the space of 72
        hours. As a result, an avalanche of calls and faxes
        opposing the amendment poured into congressional
        offices. Talk radio took up the issue. "Please stop
        calling," one congressional chief of staff begged a
        home school lobbyist. "I believe in democracy. It's
        just that we've had about as much democracy as we can
        handle for one day." The amendment, which had been
        expected to pass, was defeated by a vote of 424 to 1.
        Access to the news through alternative information
        networks literally kept private school and home school
        students free.
        
             The alternative media and new information
        technology are revolutionizing our entire society by
        changing the way many issues, from education to taxes
        to health care, are debated. Americans have a greater
        opportunity than ever before to find out what is going
        on and to make their voices heard. "The congregation
        has rebelled against the media priesthood and is doing
        an end-run around it," says media analyst Robert
        Lichter.
        
             We, the media gatekeepers, had better look out!
        The gate is swinging wide open. We can no longer
        effectively bottle up information and keep it from the
        public if we don't like it. The Berlin Wall that has
        existed for decades in the media industry is falling
        apart brick by brick. We cannot guard the entire length
        and breadth of the electronic spectrum. We cannot hem
        in every cable program, talk radio show, computer
        bulletin board, and fax machine.
        
        
                      The Public's Responsibility
        
             The media revolution is bringing about a more
        open, vigorous, and honest debate on issues. Though
        media and government elites still command a great deal
        of power, the public has access to more information--
        and, therefore, more power--than ever before.
        
             It also means that the public has more
        responsibility than ever before. Citizens should not be
        satisfied when journalists and politicians try to
        persuade them they must leave solutions to the
        "experts." Nor should they blindly accept the argument
        that the system of limited government and maximum
        personal liberty the framers of the Constitution
        devised is inadequate to address modern problems. As
        President Ronald Reagan reminded us, "The experts tell
        us there are no simple answers to our difficulties.
        They're wrong. There are simple answers, just not easy
        ones."
        
             The American people have it in their power to
        rediscover the simple answers and the "legacy of
        freedom" that Hillsdale College President George Roche
        argues is the cornerstone as well as the central,
        animating force of our nation. The media revolution
        will help them.
        
             ---------------------------------------------
        
        John Fund is an editorial writer for the Wall Street
        Journal. His insightful articles have made him a
        familiar name to America's top business executives and
        political leaders.
        
             He began his journalism career in 1982 as
        investigative reporter for syndicated columnists
        Rowland Evans and Robert Novak. In 1984, he joined the
        Journal as deputy features editor for the editorial
        page, and since 1987 has specialized in writing about
        politics and government. He is the co-author with James
        Coyne of Cleaning House: America's Campaign for Term
        Limits and collaborated with Rush Limbaugh on his
        number-one, best-selling book, The Way Things Ought to
        Be.
        
                                  ###
        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
          End of this issue of Imprimis, On Line; Information
           about the electronic publisher, Applied Foresight,
                   Inc., is in the file, IMPR_BY.TXT
        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        
