General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA Profit Driven Press is NOT a Free One
They are not free to pursue anything that doesn't yield a profit.
How do they get around this Constitutional barrier? I am really asking...
yagotme
(2,847 posts)Have to be the first to print that story, right or wrong, just to say "We're the first." Got to have that advertising dollar.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)Johnathan146
(141 posts)It doesn't mandate it. Of course newspapers and tv stations are profit driven. They might not run a negative story one of the major advertisers. There are blogs an other independent journalist.
What is your solution?
Igel
(35,191 posts)Many want it to be without cost to them, or make the presses free from their owners (and presumably subject to what others want).
Don't like the press that is, aim for the press that should be: Start your own. Never easier with the advent of photocopiers and the Internet.
LAS14
(13,749 posts)HoneyBadger
(2,297 posts)I would think that you need to pay them out of some sort of blind trust system to really ensure integrity.
Or they have to be super wealthy. There is the Silicon Valley goal of making eff you money. At a certain threshold, you are beholden to no one and free to act on your conscience.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)A Free Press generally refers to free from interference from the govt.
Here's a free (as in beer) clue: There's nothing unconstitutional about making profit in the press industry.
Now, if your idea is some 'stipend' for journalists to 'unencumber' them, then yeah, you've got a problem. Because that stupid shit would be exactly what the 1st amendment was meant to prevent-- the state interfering with the press.
And if you take away the profit, you take away resources to investigate.
The media might consider certain subjects off limits, but they can spend tens of thousands on a major investigation.
Some guy and his blog might investigate everything, but might only have a budget of a few hundred bucks.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)it isn't *free* anymore. And, yes, I am aware of "free" and "free". My context is correct.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)a level of protection. It's as if there's a hole in our entire system of government. Particularly since Limbaugh and faux news... there's no way for people who bathe in that gunk to see the truth (as we know it to be), so they don't vote on the basis of what's best for us -or even themselves.
What's that website someone posted about earlier this week that's getting off the ground to be a bipartisan source of news/fact checking?...
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)JudyM
(29,122 posts)again once it gets up and running.
libtodeath
(2,888 posts)That is why they prop up hate radio and provide the money to the print media in exchange for them normalizing their lies.