Robi Ganguly’s Big Ideas

I don’t often talk about politics on my blog. I’m not sure why – I was a Politics, Philosophy and Econ (say that three times fast) major who used to spend a lot of time thinking about taking the traditional path to a career in politics (law school, work for a firm, start local, go national etc). I even spent time at C-SPAN and still consider myself relatively well-versed in political issues. But, I don’t address it often here.. Maybe that’ll change with Election ‘08.

In any case, I’ve been watching the pending purchase of XM by Sirius Satellite with a bit of my attention, hoping that it wouldn’t get killed by stupid regulators (it’s in review by the FCC and Justice Department).

I came across this news about Herb Kohl’s objection to the merger and just had to rant about it for a few moments. Now, I consider myself a Democrat and furthermore, I was born in Wisconsin and still feel affinity with the folks back there (you go Feingold!). But damn it, Kohl is way way way off the reservation here.

The central premise of his argument is this: satellite radio is its own separate market and, “No other technology available today is a substitute for the satellite radio.”

Just contemplate that for a moment – does that make ANY sense? This REEKS of special interests being involved. The lobbying organizations of traditional radio are doing what they do best; working to further the interests of their members. We shouldn’t expect anything less – for better or worse, our system of governance is based upon representation and advocacy. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) has long been involved in pushing its agenda through the political system. I came across a few posts/articles that do a pretty good job of summarizing some of their activities (clearly anti-NAB though) and have placed those at the bottom of this post.

*deep breath*

Let’s examine Kohl’s arguments for a moment though, assuming that the NAB’s involvement or lack thereof is inconsequential. No substitute for satellite radio? Really?? So a service that requires a monthly subscription fee, a purchase of a specific device and that offers audio content has NO substitute? Hmm let me rattle off a few for Mr. Backwards:

• AM Radio (free, requires a radio)
• FM Radio (free, requires a radio)
• Podcasts on the Internet (many are free, requires Internet connection and speakers)
• Streaming music over the Internet (several free ones, requires Internet connection and speakers)
• Radio through cable providers (includes subscription to cable and a tv, at least)

Am I missing something here? How are these not substitutes? As I stop and contemplate this, the only thing that Herbie the Gov-Bug could really be arguing here is that the American consumer can’t freely access the specific content available on satellite radio in any other audio distribution channel. But, last I checked, that’s how most of the media world works: by securing the rights to specific content, driving demand for it and if possible, owning the distribution of it too. Seems to me like Mr. Kohl should wake up, check out the 20th century and then, if possible, come join us in the 21st at some point.

So, is Herb Kohl out there lying his face off for the NAB and other interested parties? Because if he’s not, well, that leaves one other option.

Coincidentally enough, I just got the weekly column from David Pogue in my inbox today, talking about Maplight and OpenSecrets; two very cool sites that share fundraising information on candidates. It turns out that not only has Kohl not raised much money from corporate interests, he’s actually independently wealthy. He even owns the Milwaukee Bucks (ouch).

So, there you have it, he’s just a moron.

As an American citizen, I don’t like either outcome

A few links on the NAB:

NAB’s history of stifling competition

NAB: a history of hypocrisy

Reason Magazine: Dinosaurs vs. Satellites

Popularity: 1% [?]