h&f 0050 Adventures in ReMixT Journalism, Ed. 1: Cap And Trade

Roll The "Credits"

Roll The "Credits"

ReMixT journalism occurred on this post:h&f 0048 A Modest Exchange: People for Companies

What if we continued that line, starting with journalism.  Some folks get frustrated with “mainstream media,” on the Left and Right, but any news should be put into the context of its incentives and constraints, i.e. where the money comes from.  This applies equally to both the Left and the Right establishments.

So take off your made-in-China Chavez t-shirt before bringing any fist or chest bumps on this, and put your brain in gear.

Ok. Enough intro. Let’s get the first ReMixT post, on journalism itself:

Cap and Trade Journalism

Let’s remix a wikipedia entry on cap and trade and let you judge how you read/get your news…

Emissions trading (or emission trading) is an administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentive for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. It is sometimes called cap and trade. hey dj! start remix…

A central authority (usually a government or international body) [big money source] sets a limit or cap on the amount of a pollutant [establishment-disruptive news] that can be emitted. Companies [Popular news outlets] or other groups are issued emission permits [money] and are required to hold an equivalent number of allowances (or credits) [rights to produce establishment-disruptive news] which represent the right to emit a specific amount. The total amount of  allowances and credits cannot exceed the cap, limiting total emissions [establishment-disruptive news] to that level. Companies [Popular news outlets] that need to increase their emissions must buy credits from those who pollute less [the people, i.e. convert to independent support]. The transfer of allowances is referred to as a trade [the more disruptive news]. In effect, the buyer [converted, independent news outlet] is paying a charge for polluting [establishment-disruptive news], while the seller [remaining popular news outlet] is being rewarded for having reduced emissions [establishment-disruptive news] by more than was needed. Thus, in theory, those that can easily reduce emissions [establishment-disruptive news] most cheaply [profitably] will do so, achieving the pollution [establishment-disruptive news] reduction at the lowest [highest] possible cost to society.

prologue: you get what you pay for.


~ by ericjhenderson on October 1, 2008.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: