Great insight into a perspective being ignored by the press forces who favor corporate ownership as a form of free press.

But that's where my rub comes in. How can any press, TV or otherwise, really be representative of the people if it is controlled by a corporate elite or the state.

I mention the state in the case of Ven. in that in the short term, it might be a good thing, but if the state has control absolutely (as in the purse strings), as a matter of law, then what happens if a good state is replaced by a bad state down the road unforseen at present -- or even a capitulating state under the thumb of foreign powers?

What happens if Granier replaces Chavez, for example? That may seem an impossible extreme, but then look at how far certain of Ven.'s northern neighbors have come on that front in a short time.

TV, in particular, is susceptible to control by the few at the expense of the many -- whether that is a greedy corporate oligarchy or a corrupt state -- because of the large capital investment required to play in that field.

So, it seems to me, it is not enough to answer the question of whether any TV license should be under the control of a corporate or state power, because to me, in the extreme, both pose extreme danger, because of the simple potential of great power to be concentrated, largely unchecked, in the hands of a few who have no reason to assure the benefit of the many.

Under state ownership, RCTV can open the doors to independent producers, etc., which does make its programming more democratic, at least in the short run. But the money is now coming from the state, as opposed to a powerful corporate elite.

So it seems to me that the real question, and not an easy nut to crack, even by well-intentioned leaders, is how does Ven. assure that in the future, beyond Chavez, that the power of the state, the purse strings of the state, are not turned against the people with respect to RCTV.

What efforts, systems, controls are in place, or going to be put in place, to assure that the power to control the media is not concentrated, but diffused and within grasp of all the people?

This is not an answer I have, but it is one I'm seeking. And I hope that Ven. has a theory to test on that front that might take us further down that road to a more enlightened, democratic media. If they do, I want to learn more about it, and excuse my ignorance.

In any event, as a dear departed friend of mine once convinced me of about life -- theory and practice make praxis, and praxis is an important path to enlightened existence, at least in my view:

Definition: Praxis is a complex activity by which individuals create culture and society, and become critically conscious human beings. Praxis comprises a cycle of action-reflection-action which is central to liberatory education. Characteristics of praxis include self-determination (as opposed to coercion), intentionality (as opposed to reaction), creativity (as opposed to homogeneity), and rationality (as opposed to chance).

This is not a critique; please understand that. It's a simple inquiry about our global future.