Media is often accused for exaggerating different news, although they don't know the reality but still they assume different stories by themselves which is certainly referred as hot topic in public! We have some extremely reputed media houses and some which are power/money hungry who sensationalise news for their own financial benefits. For this reason government should have a control on media.
Recently in Pathankot NDTV India revealed ' Sensitive Details ' ,that became helpful to terrorists to be successful in their plans . So , I believe media should be controlled by the government .
' YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES '
It would produce a more factual statement of information than what is provided by media companies today. In modern times it is all about "selling" the news in which case the most important stories are often ignored because they are boring to watch. Having the government control the media -to a certain extent- is necessary to keep citizens from being misinformed.
Read the bill of rights, I mean, Right to Free Speech, PRESS, assembly, religion and petition. This would be the complete opposite of American ideals. Ever read the novel 1984, that is why the government should not be able to control the media alone.
I need 6 more words lol.
The main argument is that government controls will destroy the freedom of expression and the independence of the media. A society cannot progress socially or politically without a free media. For example, in many countries with an authoritarian rule, media like television and newspapers face strict controls. People in such societies lead lives like those of sheep thinking and saying waht the authorities wish them to.
The government already controls mass media. It's called the FCC, and they control the airwaves. In the case of the printed press, which is protected, they can cause a nightmare by delaying the renewal or granting of broadcast licenses of people who advertise for factions they don't like. They shouldn't, but they do.
No, the government should not control the the media.The role of the media should be as the watchdog of the government and of course that would never had happened if the government controls the media.Also there is the risk of the press would only publish pro-government messages instead of the total truth.
The government should not control the media for several reasons. An independent media is needed as a check on the government. The government doesn't have the time money or resources to control the media. It would stifle innovation, creativity, and cause severe problems for the media industry and the economy as a whole.
The media should not control the government. If this happened, we would not be a free nation. The government would put out information that is pleasing to them. This is what communist nations do and tyrants love this. The media should always be free and be hands off from the government.
In reality the government does control the media and what is "let out" to the public. Years ago I worked in radio as an announcer and what came across the AP wire was not exactly the truth most of the time. The government believes it is protecting the common public, but are they really?
I believe the United States government does too much to control the media in the United States and I certainly don't believe they should control the media even more. At present the government wouldn't even admit to doing so, but the fact is, is that our journalists and activists are being targeted by the government. The fact is, is we do not get the same information as outsiders.