All opinion articles are the opinion of the author and not necessarily of American Military News. If you are interested in submitting an Op-Ed, please email [email protected]
With the whirlwind of hype and international implications surrounding the groundbreaking summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, we the people deserve to be able to watch.
Information flows at the speed of light, and in this day and age, the best events are broadcasted for big bucks.
If the summit between the two world leaders – of which the Trump Administration’s ultimate goal is complete and verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula – were to be broadcasted for viewers to watch, the possibilities for even more reach are endless.
The proceeds could go toward fixing the VA or to combat some global crisis.
Where the money would go could be the largest selling point. All parties involved could split the funds to give to various goodwill purposes, with America getting the largest share. I think that’s fair, considering not many homes in North Korea are likely to buy this pay-per-view, being as they don’t have access to the internet.
The money should benefit the greater good, regardless of the outcome of the summit.
Western countries, such as the U.S. and Canada, have given millions of dollars over the years to combat famine in North Korea, so maybe that would be the mutual interest that could get all parties to agree toward a common goal.
As we continue to blur the lines between entertainment and news, I believe many of us would want to be a fly on the wall at the summit, and some day we might be able to simply “subscribe” to future events such as this.
If the summit were to be pay-per-view, it could set a world precedent, and the future of politics could very well turn into a capitalistic venture.
It seems like you can’t buy anything without being offered the option to enroll in that company’s tier-based membership these days, with the best perks going to those who can afford it.
A pay-per-view event could be offered with various levels of access. Imagine the revenue that could be generated by setting some modest prices.
Based on the media coverage of the event so far – and the huge draw Kim Jong Un, who rarely steps into the spotlight on the world stage, and President Trump, who is no stranger to TV cameras – it seems obvious that people would want to tune in for something like this, and they’d likely be willing to pay for it.
Here are a few suggestions of how it could be done:
- $10 could get you one camera angle with no sound, just commentary, streamed right to your smartphone.
- $25 would get you two camera angles with some close-ups, with captioned text on the bottom of the screen.
- $100 would get you three camera angles with multiple ongoing close-ups and full sound.
Sporting events are often viewed in luxury, so why not apply the same theory to the summit, too?
For $10,000, maybe you would get to watch the summit in style from a penthouse suite in the Trump International Hotel Las Vegas.
And $100,000 could get you a private party for you and some of your closest friends, with a celebrity chef to cater the event. Maybe there could even possibly be celebrities in attendance.
The summit will inherently be scrutinized, reviewed, and even likely taught to history and political scholars in classrooms for decades to come. Imagine if the summit was dissected with the same painstaking dedication to facts and statistics as a championship sports game.
The possibilities are endless.
There could even be real-time betting like in sports in Europe or fantasy sports in the U.S.
Bars and restaurants could be packed with people wanting to tune in and see the fate of the world being crafted – a bit dramatic, but also somewhat true.
Comedians and meme makers would hang on to every moment with baited breath just to be able to squeeze every drop of comedy out of the tense situation before anyone else beats them to the punch. This could be the definition of “water cooler talk” the next day at work.
Some critics might say this monopolizes the news, but the idea would be not to control the flow of information, but rather to pay for the opportunity to see it live, rather than hear it after the fact.
This can be likened to those who paid $99.99 to watch the Floyd Mayweather Jr.-Conor McGregor boxing event live, verses waiting until the media reported the event afterward for free.
Would you be wiling to pay to watch the President of the United States and the North Korean dictator meet and talk live on pay-per-view? I sure would, and I would console myself (and my accountant) by saying “my money went to a good cause after all.”
All opinion articles are the opinion of the author and not necessarily of American Military News. If you are interested in submitting an Op-Ed, please email [email protected]aryNews.com.