OCR Text |
Show National Enterprise Page Eleven Whos Robbing Whom? The social conscience, is a magnificent thing. To those who are needy, we have given clothing, food and shelter. During the past 15 years the breadth of our generosity has grown from$21 billion to over $150 billion a year. We had, after all, become the most productive and J most affluent nation on earth and we could well afford to better care for our poor, our sick, our aged. Open arms and warm hearts have brought us dangerously close to the brink of moral bankruptcy. No longer do the needy view welfare payments, unemployment compensation, etc. as temporary assistance from Americans more fortunate, but as a natural right, an obligation owed them by the government for merely living and breathing. Government in the American psyche erroneously became an inexhaustible source of wealth, a keeper and provider for all. Likewise, while support for the public sector mushroomed, so did contempt for the private Tax away the profits of large sector. corporations to finance the social conscience, was the strategy. If profit is dirty, surely indigence is holy. But all the while, no one realized it was not government that created the wealth for public dole. It is you and it is I. That explains why our real spendable income has not increased for the past six years and why total income reinvested in business (the goose that lays the golden eggs) is the lowest of any advanced country in the world. Prosperity is waning and unemployment is the highest in 35 years. How much longer can we afford to rob the rich to give to the poor? Dont worry about it. You1l.be trading places with him soon. Did you happen to watch the Lindberg kidnapping case on television the other night? It was well done. But thats not my point. Do you remember the reporters? If you believe the T. V. version, you would think that they didnt give a damn for any human values-th- ey only wanted the story. Well, Ive had some experience with the press in my life and I find them to be a good deal more human than that. They an. And when you come right down to it, are just that-hum- thats the problem. Ill be happy to buy you a beer and give you my views of the world. What I say may or may not make sense, but put me on national television and let me say the same exact thing and youre ten times as likely to be impressed. The thing works in both directions. If Im on national television or write a column read by millions, Im going to take my opinions more seriously, too. After all, Ill say to myself, what I say must be important or else I wouldnt be on national television. And youll think its important, too, for the same reason. In truth, I might not be one inch more insightful than the man in the bar. Let me give you an example of how far all this can go. Have you ever listened to N.B.C. radio news on the hour? At the end of the news, the broadcaster says, The hours top story... and then he repeats the headline of the first story. Now think of the influence that one or two people have. The hours top story,- the man says. No one suggests that its simply an opinion. Its not possible, I assume, that troop movements in the Middle East could possibly rival the Patty Hearst case for importance? Apparently not. They didnt say that Patty Hearst was one of the hours interesting stories. It was the top story. Good old Patty Hearst. What fun for all of us. First of all. attomies cant advertise, so how could Mr. F. Lee Bailey work out a better deal? Actually, the Patty Hearst case everything. It has sex. It has violence, it has the endless struggle between the values of the young and those of their parents. In short, the Patty Hearst case has it all. In fact, it only lacks one thing: it lacks significance. The whole damn thing doesnt matter. But it does sell, and thats why its the hours top story. The truth of it all is that editors tend to print what we want to read. Ill never forget a headline I once saw in the Seattle P.I. It is, or was, I believe, a Hearst newspaper. Anyway, years - ago when I was going to the University of Washington, I was greeted with a headline that informed me, Dog Drowns in Revena Park. Well, I like dogs as much as you do, but what sort of top story item was that? We all know that the spectacular sells. What people dont want are the details. The other day you read that those Manhatten and First National City Bank in NSw York were on an early warning list. The implication was that they were about to go under. A great story for the Washington Post. However, what everyone forgot to report was that the ratios were outdated. Also, the Washington Post failed to point out that Chase and First National. City are national banks. Thats why they were included on national lists. Most of the other large banks in New York are state banks. Hence, they would be governed by different authorities. Anyway, its only by John Prince details. If one can create the impression that two large New York banks are about to fold, just imagine how many newspapers you can sell. In truth I dont think the reporter is thinking in terms of selling papers. I do, however, believe that most reporters are super liberal by nature. They simply start by nature in believing the very worst about all kinds of business. In their But they just simply dont minds they are being fair. understand what its like to keep net costs below net revenue. As a result, we have mass support in the press for oil policies that will actually retard oil exploration policies, which win squander a precious resource, investigations that could destroy our intelligence network and cuts in military spending The Prince Column Editorial Bias at a time when the Russians are actually pulling ahead. As I said at first, the working press are not bad people. They really arent. In fact, they are pretty dam dedicated. But I wish that they had more experience in meeting a payroll. Anyway enough of this. Dont take what I say too seriously. Im a businessman and I have biases. Most news reporters arent businesspeople and they have biases, too. Editors want to sell papers and news directors need ratings to keep their job. If we keep this in mind we can more fairly evaluate the things we read and hear Cheers , John Prince Partner, Prince, Langheinrich & Greer. |