Your Headline Was Cheap

Reader says headline of article was an anti-conservative cheap shot.

[Response to You Are A Socialist from September 4, 2003.]

[September 17, 2003]

Dear Editors:

Why did you choose to label the article about the Cato Institute's book, "You are a Socialist"?

What purpose or connection did that label have to the article's content, much less the content of the book?

Was it you intent to misconstrue and bash a conservative viewpoint? Or was it just a cheap headline that was intended to grab attention?

In my humble opinion, you abuse your position as an editor to stoop to such levels.

Regards,

Doug

Dear Doug:

I took the headline from the title of the book: What's Yours is Mine: The Rise of Infrastructure Socialism. The authors argue that anyone asking for line sharing is arguing for a socialist intervention into the market (ignoring that the monopolies are some of the nation's largest campaign contributors and are very active across the U.S. in lobbying and lawsuits).

The title certainly is meant to grab people's attention. This is an important debate.

It is also a divisive debate. Our ISP readers, and other telecom resellers, may well be in trouble if the economics in this book is used to dictate government policy. I'm currently reading through the FCC decision, and they seem to accept that opening networks is anti-competitive, whereas allowing monopolies to cut each other off (Microsoft OS, AOL IM, phone and electric companies) would encourage investors to build alternative infrastructure.

There are a large number of issues here, and it's always good to have a debate going, which is why I hope that these ideas are seen by the mainstream, not just hidden, for example, on p.56 (item 79, including the footnote citing Guber) of the FCC decision [.pdf].

Regards,

Alex Goldman