Should governments bailout journalism: Are these organizations good examples of subsidization?

  • Yes, government should probably bail out journalism.

    The deregulation of communications since passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has allowed for ownership of media to become very concentrated, limiting the number of voices speaking. The commercialization of journalism has had much the same effect; emphasis is on profits rather than on gathering and reporting news. The justification for the latter is that media outlets are giving us what we want. The problem is that journalism should give us what we need, whether we want it or not. We are less informed and perhaps more comfortable. Government becoming involved with media is sticky business. Anything resembling government ownership of media smacks of fascism. However, it is vital that journalism remain as free as possible of the corrupting influences of money, so perhaps it is necessary that government step in and provide a baseline income to keep free journalism afloat.

  • No, government should not bailout journalism.

    No, government should not bailout journalism. The government should not get involved in journalism as this should be free anyway. Journalism should remain as free as possible and if the government steps in, this will be a sticky situation and the value of freedom of the press will diminish. The government should be helping out Americans in different ways to restore the already broke economy.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.