Replies: 1 Comment

So, everyone hates the fundraising nonsense in public televiision and radio. If I understand it right (that is, if they are not lying when they tell viewers/listeners why they should contribute), the contributions offset the raw material costs of broadcast.

And the Internet is clearly the solution for game distribution, at least in part. I think the main problem with Rejeski's argument is that I don't think he actually means to suggest a Corporation for Public Gaming. Rather, institutions *like* the *existing* American CPB could be funded, and could use its funding, to support gamemakers.

Of course, one of the most powerful featrues of public radio and TV is their broad reach through broadcast channels. The Internet is a logical option, but I think we shouldn't underestimate the power of PBS and NPRs ability to reach people through the same box by which they get ABC or HBO or Star 94 FM.

True, more and more people download games from the Internet. But there's some power in putting media in context, for example, documentaries alongside Michael Bay schlock at Best Buy. So, one role of such an organization might also be traditional publishing and distribution.

Anyway, I think what Rejeski really means to suggest is something like a Public Gaming Publisher or something. ...