Play
about love, written by
John Paul II, set to open in Washington
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Pope John Paul II’s play about the trials,
tribulations and triumphs of love, “The Jeweler’s Shop,”
will open at the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center on May 19 — his
birthday.
The play, which is being performed in the Washington area for the first
time, celebrates the late pope’s message about love, marriage and
family, in his own words.
George Gordon, who is co-producing the play with Nancy Nora O’Donoghue,
has described “The Jeweler’s Shop” as “a very
moving experience.”
It has been described by Newsday as “marvelous” and “a
message for our times,” and a reviewer for the Gannett newspaper
chain found it to be “surprisingly secular” and “a compelling
evening of entertainment that touches the audience in unexpected ways.”
The play was written by the late pope in 1960, when he was still serving
as Bishop Karol Wojtyla in Krakow, Poland. It was adapted by Ted Davis,
and translated into English by Boleslaw Taborski.
“Every time we perform this beautiful play, the audience is moved
by the pope’s words and messages, to the point of joy and tears,”
Gordon said. “Many don’t realize that John Paul II was an
accomplished playwright, director, and actor.” He holds the English
production rights to all Pope John Paul II’s plays, and previously
produced the show on tour for several years.
The three-act play with musical introductions will run at 8 p.m. Fridays
and Saturdays, and at 2 p.m. Sundays from May 19 through June 18, except
on Memorial Day weekend, May 26-28.
Ticket prices range in cost up to $17, with special rates for groups as
well as students, seniors, clergy and religious. For reservations call
202-635-5468; or e-mail tickets@jp2cc.org. Free parking is available.
For general information about the center call 202-635-5400 or visit
www.jp2cc.org.
Cable
choice on the horizon
By Susan Brinkmann
CS&T Correspondent
Imagine going to the grocery story to buy milk, and being told you can
buy the milk only if you buy a carton of cigarettes and a six-pack of
beer as well.
Chances are, you wouldn’t go back there again, would you?
Too bad we don’t have the same option when it comes to the programs
we buy from cable companies. In order to get the family-friendly fare
we want, we have to buy a slew of raunchy programs in the package.
“There is something terribly and fundamentally wrong with requiring
consumers to pay for a product they don’t want, and may even find
offensive, in order to get something they do want,” said L. Brent
Bozell III, Founder and President of the Parents Television Council. “But
that’s exactly what the cable industry has been forcing subscribers
to do for years.”
Now that may be about to change — finally.
A new study by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has found that
cable choice is economically feasible, and could save consumers up to
13 percent on their monthly bills.
That study reversed the findings of a 2004 study by the FCC, which concluded
that consumers would pay more for pricing that allowed them to choose
and pay for only the channels they wanted.
The FCC has determined that earlier study was flawed, and relied on biased
information submitted by the cable industry.
“The FCC puts the lie to cable magnates’ wild claims that
a la carte [pricing] would cost consumers more money and is not economically
feasible,” said Lanier Swann, Director of Government Relations at
Concerned Women for America. “That argument has fallen flat on its
face now that the FCC has shown that consumers can save up to 13 percent
on their monthly cable bill.”
The new report has added momentum to a growing campaign among American
consumers to do away with the typical “bundling” system offered
by cable companies that forces customers to pay for hundreds of channels
they don’t watch. According to cable industry estimates, consumers
watch between 15 and 17 channels a month, and yet the typical, “expanded
basic” package offered by cable providers includes up to 300 channels.
Whether they watch the channels or not, consumers are forced to pay for
them, which is why cable bills have leaped 40 percent in the last five
years — three to four times the rate of inflation.
Those high bills contain charges for obscene and offensive programs and
channels, forcing consumers to subsidize them in order to get the clean
fare they want.
Many cable companies are fighting the move toward cable choice, because
of how it will affect their bottom lines. Advertising rates are based
on the number of viewers that system operators can reach. The more channels,
the more potential viewers. Thus, cable companies can command high add
rates and subscription fees.
According to Bozell, cable companies have tried everything to stave off
what is beginning to look like the inevitable.
“They said that technology prohibited such an option. We proved
that the technology did exist,” Bozell said in a recent press release.
“Then the cable industry said they would help customers to block
networks they didn’t like. We exposed the flaw that consumers would
still be forced to pay for the unwanted networks they chose to block.”
The cable companies also attempted to convince people that cable a la
carte would force smaller, niche and minority-targeted networks into bankruptcy
— which was found to be untrue. Then they tried to scare consumers
by saying prices would increase and they would still have few channels,
a claim proved false by the latest FCC report.
“Knowing that their backs were against the wall, the cable industry
did last month what it said it would not and could not do: provide a ‘family
tier’ of cable networks so parents could protect their children
from graphic and gratuitous programming,” Bozell said. “And
over the past few weeks we have exposed the fatal flaw of this ‘last
gasp.’ … Family tiers were designed by the cable industry
solely to appease Washington lawmakers, not to give a real solution to
families concerned with harsh cable content.”
Washington isn’t buying it either. U.S. Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.)
announced plans to introduce a bill that will offer regulatory relief
as an incentive to cable providers to offer choice to their customers.
The fight may finally be waning among cable providers, however, especially
in the face of the rising consumer discontent, which began in earnest
after Janet Jackson’s 2004 Super Bowl “wardrobe malfunction.”
A recent Associated Press poll showed that 66 percent of those polled
said there was too much sex on television, and 68 percent said there was
too much violence.
If given the choice of choosing their own cable channels, 78 percent of
Americans said they would do so — a five-to- one margin over those
who want the bundle.
“The American people are demanding cable choice because they want
control over their TV screens,” Swann said. “Families do not
want to be taken advantage of any longer. As Americans see more and more
filth filling their cable channels, they are demanding an opportunity
to opt out of having to view and subsidize such inappropriate programming.”
To become involved in the move toward cable choice, visit the Parents
Television Council Web site at www.parentstv.org or
call 1-800-882-6868.
Contact Susan Brinkmann at fiat723@aol.com or (215) 965-4615