

For further information about Per Arnoldi, current exhibitions, picture downloads, please see:
http://www.arnoldi.dk/
http://www.nivaagaard.dk/?Home%26nbsp%3B
Today the tax commission published its report with suggestions to the government to our future economic problems. And the wise chairman, Carsten Koch, assured everybody at the press conference that the commission suggestions were not based on dynamic effects. But were all fully financed through tax reform, removing the middle tax entirely, and adding supplementary green taxes. And then. In the future there will be more (non-working) elderly people - to be financed by graduately reduced numbers of people in the work force. Only half of the future problem with lacking work force will be solved through this tax suggestion, about seven billion DKK. The rest - it turned out - would be assured by convincing people to work more, through tax reliefs. Overlooking the fact that several surveys show that people are not likely to use tax reliefs to work more. Three out of four would rather spend more time with their families. Still, isn't that what some people call dynamic effects? I'm sorry, I'm just paradoxed here.
The students were to have their student grants reduced from the fully financed six years (one year more than candidate level) to just four years. Whether they are to work at McDonalds or become poorer students, there is no sure way of saying. The winners seem to be the really poor and the really wealthy. Whereas the middle income house owners will gain less, and pay more over time. Perhaps a reprimande for the past couple of years of overspending on house loans and blown up house prices?
There is something for everybody in this reform: Greener economy, relieving the poor, creating dynamic effects, making the wealthy happier. This should satisfy political parties from The Socialists (F), The Social Democrats (S), The Social-Liberals (B), to The Liberals (V), The Concervatives (C), and The Danish People's Party (O). Each with little bits and pieces to match their political agendas. The only losers seem to be middle income people, students, house owners, and private companies. But hey, aren't those the ones to make the economic wheels run, now and in the future? Let's see how this tax reform plays out in the political negociations to follow.
For further information, see:
http://www.skattekommissionen.dk/
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/12/dynamic-debate-or-comic-relief.html
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/cliff-notes-to-danish-politics
Last night a friend and I attended the taping of a cultural tv-magazine, Autograf/Autograph on DR2. Just for the entertainment of it. And enlightenment. The guest of honour was Leif Davidsen, a former Soviet correspondent for Danish television - turned author on a permanent basis for the past ten years. The show was hosted by the ever energetic Clement Kjersgaard, shooting questions in all possible directions. When not handing over the microphone to members of the audience for questions.
Leif Davidsen had a lot to share, whether it be from his thriller novels or from his past experiences reporting from the Soviet Union or Cuba. One point was that more or less all journalists dream of writing The Great Thriller at some point. And that journalists had an advantage from their experiences with reporting and mediating. But that most of them fall into the trap of 'fact writing'. My paradoxical question was whether journalists reversely gain anything from having worked as authors. From a former correspondent's point of view he wasn't convinced. He didn't like the fashion of bringing descriptive elements of fiction writing into journalism, such as is the case with for instance New Journalism. Viewers will just have to wait to hear and see him tell about the more interesting parts on this show when it airs.
For further information, see:
http://www.dr.dk/dr2/autograf
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/12/media-melt-down
Guided by the advice, because I have found no other love, I will stick with my loves - but whoever in my network solves the quiz and finds a way to let me know will help to re-open the full potential. Anyway.
If Mr. Sun Yusheng from the Chinese television station of CCTV was moderate in his talk about censorship in Chinese media, Ms. Yuezhi Zhao had none of these qualms in her talk on today's conference on Chinese media in Copenhagen. But as a Ph.d in communications at the Simon Fraser University, she lives and workes in Canada.
According to Ms. Yuezhi Zhao the tendencies in Chinese media is - quote - 'a rise in the dictatorship of economics', and a 'neo-liberal ideology and Social Darwinism in street tabloids has become dominant' - unquote. In her analysis, this is caused by a huge growth in the middle class Chinese, who enjoy all the benefits of the Chinese economic wonder. That leaves the farmers and workers to be a problem for society. A fifty percent burden. The logic being, quote - 'either you die or I die' - unquote. The viewpoint in Chinese media is always the middle class. As an example she gave: in the coverage of China's WTO entry, out of 500 news stories not one story covered an interview with an ordinary farmer or worker.
Another tendency in Chinese media, according to Ms. Zhao, is a lot of 'happy talk' (e.g. Hunan satellite TV) and consumer angled stories - to the neglect of worker's conditions.
Altogether, in her view, the media market is based on a logic of 'one dollar, one vote' as opposed to 'one person, one vote'. The media is undergoing a social power re-structuring, where the middle class is empowered, and the commercialization of the media gives rise to new media suppliers and urban newspapers. For instance from the real estate industry, government officials, state enterprise managers, private business men, and journalists.
According to Ms. Zhao, the market driven media should pursue these goals:
* Stirring up debates
* Exposing government corruption
* Opening for sympathy with the lower classes
One question for Ms. Zhao from interviewer Mette Holm (former Beijing correspondent) was about the future for press freedom. And Ms. Zhao saw the market driven media as a vehicle for more press freedom. Eventually to create public service channels free of government censorship. Paradoxically, the market should lead the way to 'public service'.
'China's problem is no longer just China's problem - it's a global problem,' she stated in her finishing remarks.
For further information, see:
http://www.cmns.sfu.ca/people/faculty/zhao_y/