You are browsing the archive for 2013 June 30.

Avatar of admin

by admin


June 30, 2013 in History

June 30, 2013 11:44 a.m.

Just as the weather starts heating up, many offices start slowing down, but not here at AMERICAN EXPERIENCE! With five hours of new programming, including our epic two-part documentary on JFK premiering in the fall, our staff has been hard at work. In June alone we have already had five screenings for various films in different levels of production. While this has become old hat to everyone here on staff, we realize that our viewers may not always be aware of the process our films go through before they air.

For most of our films we work with independent producers (JFK notwithstanding – more on that later). The filmmakers, along with their amazingly talented teams, are charged with the production, from writing the script to filming and editing to post. Our core staff works with our filmmakers as needed, helping with collecting materials, finalizing budgets and ultimately getting the programs ready to air on PBS.

Because we usually work with outside production companies, the filmmakers make trips to our office in Boston to show their progress to our Executive and Senior Producers. Eventually our VP of National Programming will sit in as well. They do this so everyone can see where the film is going and provide comments and feedback.

The process begins with the Assembly Screening, which is the first attempt to piece together the narrative. At this point the filmmaker may not have all of their footage shot or interviews conducted, just the bare bones. The next step is the Rough Cut. At this stage the film starts to take its final shape. The notes from the Rough Cut are used to guide the Fine Cut. And then, any final changes are made before the Picture Lock. This means exactly what it sounds like, the images in the film are locked and the film is ready for animation, final narration and music.

This year we have had the exciting opportunity to produce a film in house – JFK is being produced by our Series Producer with support coming from members of our staff. With Picture Lock coming up next month, the team has been working diligently to get everything just right. The office is abuzz with activity. And it is great for us here on staff to get a taste of what our outside filmmakers deal with on the day to day.

Keep checking back to learn …read more


Avatar of admin

by admin

Crisis: Interventionism or Free Markets?

June 30, 2013 in Economics

By John P. Cochran

Shawn Ritenour, author of Foundations of Economics, channels Mises to dispute the “sad narratives of the financial meltdown of 2008 and its aftermath .. that it was and remains the result of unbridled capitalism. Too much freedom spoiled the economic broth” is his excellent commentary  Is the Economic Crisis an Indictment of Capitalism?” His conclusion:

In a free market rooted in private property, the only way entrepreneurs are able to sustain profits is by serving customers better than anyone else. It is only when they receive special privileges through preferential regulation, subsidies, bailouts and the like that they are able to reap profits for which they have not sowed productive activity.

I was struck by how much of what Mises said about the response of many to the Great Depression applies closely to our current situation. Just like Mises, we must never tire of explaining the fallacies in the thinking of those who think the Great Recession is a clear case of the failure of capitalism. In fact, it is a quintessential example of the failures of interventionism to bring about anything other than economic destruction and relative impoverishment.

Pierre Lemieux’s Somebody in Charge: A Solution to Recessions? “debunks the “markets caused the problem” literature in “The Laissez-Faire Scapegoat,” and “The Crime Scene”.”

From my review:

The U.S. reforms were truly incomplete and were being reversed. Prior to the 2007–2009 recession, the U.S. system was an entrenched mixed economy with, as Lemieux puts it, “the line between politicians and bureaucrats on one hand and tightly regulated private companies on the other hand . . . blurred” (p. 82). The regulatory climate, from at least the mid- to late 1990s, was not pro-business, free market, or antiregulatory. In fact, the George W. Bush years were “one of the most regulation-heavy periods in American history,” with an “American banking system and financial system that certainly could not be described as laissez-faire. It was tightly supervised and controlled by the authorities—in the spirit of the times” (p. 102, emphasis added). One major financial institution of central control was mostly unaffected by the liberalizations of the 1980s and actually ended the era with enhanced prestige and power—the Federal Reserve System (the Fed).

Once the crisis hit, many economists (pp. 83–102), pundits, and political opportunists such as the democratic majority on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission jumped to the conclusion that “the banks led …read more