[lit-ideas] Re: Study: Media coverage has favored Obama campaign
- From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 07:38:10 +0700
Eric Yost wrote:
"In our democratic republic, the issue is clouded by money. Money
takes the decisions away from citizens."
I think that these sorts of claims about money are red-herrings,
usually intended to lead the listener to conclusions about the threat
posed by one's favourite villains. Elections are not determined by
who has the most money. The same claims are made in sports, for
example about those favourite villains, the Yankees or Cowboys, but
the highest payrolls do not guarantee a World Series or the Super
Bowl. After all the money is spent, the game still has to be played.
Eric continues:
"Scientists, assuming they are not scientists-for-hire, would at least
offer a counterpoise to the money game, which is its own form of
disenfranchisement."
I am surprised that someone who is playing the world-weary cynic would
claim that scientists, any scientists, can function outside the 'money
game'. Science is where the real money is, a truth most of us in
academia know all too well. See Robert's post about funding and
publishing.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
