"FREEDOM MUST ADVERTISE"
(An address delivered by Tom Dillon in 1963 and updated in 1976)
(Page 2)
And what happens to newspapers? They are, to begin with, small, miserable, badly written and badly edited sheets. In the majority of cases, because circulation revenue can't possibly support them, these newspapers are the official organs of various political parties and get their revenues from party funds.
"...in the absence of advertising
revenue the concept of freedom
of the press is a joke."
| The fact of the matter is that, in the absence of advertising revenue, the concept of freedom of the press is a joke.
But, asks someone, isn't advertising, even if it doesn't cost us $28 billion a year, but only about 6 billion, a terribly inefficient and expensive part of our economy? What possible good does it do America to have people sitting in front of a TV set looking at advertising for 15 or 20 kinds of beer? Aren't there more important things in the world than deciding which brand of beer to drink?
Isn't this an inefficient use of people's time and money?
Let's look for a moment at some other inefficient things in our society. We won't have very far to look. You could look at the Constitution of the United States. You will very readily see that it is a blueprint for inefficiency.
It set up the most ridiculous and complicated method of electing two bodies, totaling more than 500 people, to argue within themselves and with each other. After they finish their interminable argumentation, they put it in the hands of a third party, the President of the United States, to carry out their orders whether he agrees with them or not. Further than that, it arranged for nine old men and women to take anywhere from two to ten years to decide whether what these two wrangling bodies had told the President to do was or was not within their power.
As if this weren't confusing and inefficient enough, every four years the whole country spends about four months in a continual uproar while hundreds of men and women make speeches and promises they haven't the slightest intention of keeping to people who know perfectly well that it would be silly to believe them. Then everybody goes into a little booth and marks X's next to the names of men and women they never heard of.
"The most efficient way
to run a country,
of course, is Plato's
suggestion that we
breed philosopher kings."
| Now, everyone can see that Plato had the right idea 2,100 years before the Constitution was framed. The most efficient way to run a country, of course, is Plato's suggestion that we breed philosopher kings. These people were going to be bred to be so smart and fair and honest and brilliant that you could put them in charge of a country and they would simply make the best possible decision about what to do. Being very wise and very honest, philosopher kings could easily settle the amount of taxes, what brand of beer everyone should drink and who was innocent and who was guilty of a crime. They could pass laws quickly and enforce them instantly.
Now, I don't think the framers of the Constitution of the United States were so dull-witted that they couldn't see that this was the most efficient form of government. But they had noticed a very interesting thing.
"So they set up the
government of the United
States with a mind
to preventing tyranny."
| In 2,100 years, no one had ever found a satisfactory philosopher king and put him on a throne. They had found only Alexander and Caesar and Frederick the Great and George III.
They came to the conclusion that efforts to find philosopher kings for 2,100 years had proved that you would get nothing but tyranny for your trouble. So they set up the government of the United States with a mind to preventing tyranny. They created the giant debating society of Congress, the Supreme Court and the President of the United States so every point of view could be aired before a decision was formalized in law.
They tried to make sure that the advocate of any point of view would have an opportunity to express his advocacy.
The Amendments IV through VIII, which were immediately tacked on to the Constitution, are also frightful sources of inefficiency. Up to 100 years before the Constitution was written, many then-civilized countries had a highly efficient way of dealing with accused criminals. One of the best, of course, was the pot of boiling water.
If the accused criminal put his hand in the pot for a minute and it came out unburned, he was innocent. This kind of system not only is inexpensive, but guarantees that no guilty man shall go unpunished. Some other countries did then and do now simply have a state-appointed judge make a decision as to the guilt or innocence of the accused with or without listening to what he has to say.
Now what did the framers of the Constitution do? They abandoned all these simple, effective methods and set up a terribly complicated, long-drawn-out and expensive process. In the first place, they made it so you had to run around and get a judge to sign an order before you could even rummage through a man's basement. Then, when you nabbed a scoundrel, you had to get an indictment from a grand jury of some 24 people. Then you had to convince 12 other people that he was guilty and do this without even being able to force him to make a confession. You had to confront him with the witnesses against him, which is often very awkward.
"...you can put up with
quite a lot of inefficiency
better than you can put
up with a little tyranny."
| You had to shag out and get his own witnesses for him and even furnish him a free attorney if he was short of cash. You had to let him go out and run around on bail until the trail took place. Now, right away, you can see that this is not an efficient way of catching and imprisoning criminals.
"They had a choice between
the freedom of mankind and
efficiency. Thank God
they took freedom."
| Now why be so complicated? Only, of course, because the framers of the Constitution, having studied the 5,000 years of man's recorded history, decided that you can put up with quite a lot of inefficiency better than you can put up with a little tyranny. They had a choice between the freedom of mankind and efficiency. Thank God they took freedom.
Amendment I of the Constitution also provided a very grave source of inefficiency and confusion and did it in a very few words. The First Amendment to the Constitution states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for redress of grievances."
(Go to page 3 of 4)
Try Another Speech?
Copyright © 1996- thepocket.com
|
