Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We Need Government Funded Media

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
davidswanson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:00 PM
Original message
We Need Government Funded Media
What it would have cost us to publicly fund independent media that would have prevented the invasion of Iraq wouldn't amount, in a year, to what we spend on a month of occupying that country.

Diverting the cost of a month of war to a year of giving substance to our "freedom of the press" would mean that the last time someone asked you about the Teabaggers' genius in being smart enough to talk dumb enough to persuade everyone to be racists would, in fact, be the LAST time anyone would ask you how a creation of the corporate media manages to get coverage from the corporate media.

But what do I mean by government-funded independent media? Isn’t that a contradiction in terms? Aren’t we better off with a completely worthless and counterproductive corporate media system than with government-controlled media? Maybe, but I said publicly FUNDED, not government CONTROLLED. And the choice is between that sort of communications system or nothing. Corporate news rooms, journalism, and investigative reporting are dying out as surely as if a plague were spreading among reporters; and they were already dying out before the internet came onto the scene. We need to take a lesson from current European or early American history and begin treating the press as the public good that Jefferson and Madison considered it, or give up on the accountability imposed on government officials in the United States just a few decades ago.

"The Death and Life of American Journalism" by Robert McChesney and John Nichols will persuade anyone with basic reading skills of the above assertions. I highly recommend reading this book, and skipping only the first page of the introduction. The authors begin by quoting a mass-murderer who libels the blogosphere and opposes "opinion" to "serious" news. But they don't mean it any more than they mean to focus on early nineteenth century US history at the expense of examining more deeply the successes of European governments in the current era. That's just packaging for xenophobes.

The book is a tour de force, providing an extremely persuasive analysis of where our communications system is headed if left alone, and a terrific survey of ways in which we can rescue it from disaster. In short, the book shows us that corporate media is dying as a form of substantive political reporting. We need a different approach. But I'm not sure we don’t also need to work within the existing and dying system, as we could have done decades ago but never have, as a step toward a long-term solution.

That is to say, in the wake of "Citizens United" we cannot possibly compete with corporate ad buys and shouldn’t try. Civic groups and labor unions and concerned Americans should not give funding to any organization or political candidate who will pass a penny along to the corporate media. Instead we should finally create our own media outlets with all of the money we waste on each election cycle.

We don't have to do so in the corporate manner. McChesney and Nichols point to other approaches, such as the L3C Low-Profit Limited Liability Company. A low profit would be more of a profit than Air America managed, and its funding and purpose would not subject it to the same risks. While we need long-term public investment in media, we need short-term private investment in the same to achieve the public understanding necessary to get us there.

Then we need the emergency and long-term steps McChesney and Nichols prescribe, including a return to better subsidized postal rates for print media, an expansion of AmeriCorps to include journalist training, an investment in high school media, and serious government funding of news reporters:

"If by 2020 we roughly doubled the number of full-time working journalists in the United States," McChesney and Nichols write, "to, say, 160,000, it would require a U.S. government subsidy of $7.2 billion in 2009 dollars." That amount of money is what the Pentagon refers to as "a rounding error."

The fact is that the fourth estate is a more critical public good than the military, police, fire, electricity, roads, water, wall street bailouts, or many other things we treat as public goods, or -- for that matter -- healthcare, retirement income, education, or many other things that some of us try to force our government to treat as public goods. And yet we do not even ask that freedom of the press be supported in any way by our elected representatives. Despite our own nation's history and many other nations' current experience of publicly funding journalism without allowing politicians to censor and direct it, we are unable to even imagine such a thing, preferring to stick with the ever worsening pretense of corporate journalism in the name of a perverted freedom of the press that has been reduced to freedom of speech for corporate conglomerates.

We need to read "The Death and Life of American Journalism" and to think hard about the fate of media outlets that are not discussing this book despite it's convincing prediction of their early demise. If these institutions would rather perish than change, how much concern can they have for the future of you or me or our children's children?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. Kinda like PBS?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HillbillyBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I quit listening when the bush fascists started inserting
their rightwing corpse stink tank personnel.
We really need is public funding of campaigns and end this corporate bribery set up we have now. sure that will happen about the time that the fundies are all raptured..like never.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. The sad fact about the "free press" experiment
is that in such a situation, news will be dumbed down to popularism for the bottom line. A search for truth would come way down the list.

I cannot remember which famous editor said it, but it went something like "At the end of the day, I'd run a popular lie hands down over an unpopular truth. It simply sells more papers.".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. Well when Bushie was in power
you could say that Faux News was a government network.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #3
24. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. When you put your head back together, check out this video:

Robert McChesney and John Nichols on “The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again”


University of Illinois Professor Robert McChesney and The Nation correspondent John Nichols, two leading advocates of the media reform movement, join us to talk about their new book, The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again. McChesney and Nichols argue that journalism should be seen as a public good and that the government should help save American journalism by granting more subsidies to newspapers and media outlets.


http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/4/robert_mcchesney_and_john_nichols_on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. E... I have the utmost respect for you and your opinions... even though I disagree with some of them
Government financing of news? Tell me you don't support it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Check out that segment when you have a chance.
Edited on Mon Feb-08-10 12:50 AM by EFerrari
The thing is, we have to re-insert the public interest into our national media or even, our local media -- whatever local media we still have.

Having five huge corporations run this stuff is not working. We need a new model. I'm still thinking about this one but you know, there is government financed media in most first world countries. Why is it that it won't work here?

I have to go walk these dogs before they melt me with their staring. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. BBC?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. Yes, exactly. Critical infrastructure for democracy.
We've seen what happens when we leave it up to the capitalists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-07-10 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
9. Would be just what the Democracy ordered.
Edited on Sun Feb-07-10 11:55 PM by Octafish
The "free Press" is the only business mentioned by name in the Constitution. It was put in the First Amendment for a reason -- to ensure an informed citizenry, necessary for freedom and the survival of the republic. For those who care to really see, things haven't looked too good of late.

Weird how some, even on DU, refuse to acknowledge the hideousness of our present situation. Do they believe Wolf Blitzer ever thinks about Adlai Stevenson Jr.'s words?

"Corruption in public office is treason."

Going by Corporate McPravda's love for Saruh Palin and ignorance of George Bush's lying America into war, I don't think so.

PS: Congratulations on the publication of your recent work in CounterPunch, Top 10 Problems with America Assassinating Americans. You know what it's all about. Thank you, davidswanson!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
12. oxymoronic from the first sentence
where the words "publically funded" and "independant media" were used.

media that is publically funded is no more "independant" than any other media.

the very idea is absurd

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
13. So the government funded media would spout hate during a republican admin? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 04:00 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. This is the BBC reporting on the government.
Blix: Straw 'gave incorrect answers' to Iraq inquiry

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4260300&mesg_id=4260300

The BBC is not perfect by any means but they're better than anything we have here except small niche shows like Amy's or Thom's or Laura's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 06:07 AM
Response to Reply #17
22. I like the idea, however there are dangers. See my post 21 below. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
14. If its government funded then by definition its not independent
As for the "number of journalists", I am still trying to determine what qualifies someone to be a journalist, as are the courts and just about everyone else. There is no required course of study, certification, license etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 01:20 AM
Response to Original message
15. K&R. Absolutely. Yes we do. //nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
16. I guess the last 8 years never impacted you, did they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 04:21 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. The last 8 years probably would have been impossible
without the coroporate media. Remember, instead of reporting that there were big problems in Ohio and that people were fixing to riot at the state house, Bush's cousin called the election for him at Faux?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 04:28 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. A better approach would be 1) break up monopolies in general and
2) divest media from non-media corporations.

The whole point of media is to check governmental AND corporate power. Not so easy to do when it's part of the government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 04:35 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. We're talking about public funds, not government production.
See for example up thread #17 where I posted a link to a BBC story reporting on the investigation of how Blair took the UK to war.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #20
30. With public funds can come government control. I like separation of powers better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 06:06 AM
Response to Original message
21. The Bush Admin would have contracted out (no bid) the gov media to Fox.
I like the idea, but we would need safeguards to keep a "current" government from affecting the "gov media". The Bush Admin made significant changes to PBS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 06:37 AM
Response to Original message
23. Once Upon A Time
People used to make furniture to make furniture--they were craftsmen, artisans if not artists. They sold quality for a fair price and made living wages for all, not poverty for the workers and millions for the Boss. Because the Boss was a worker, too.

People used to report the news to get the real story out. They knew that people doing wrong were going to lie on principle, and didn't let it stop them in their quest for a "story". They were reporters, not stenographers, and the Boss was a respected and successful reporter who knew about style and corruption, and fostered the first while exposing the second to the sterilizing effects of sunlight. People didn't spread ink on paper to make fortunes, they did it to make or break reputations.

Once upon a time, we had a democracy. Because everyone worked for a living, even those with savings, and middle class was where everyone was and wanted to be. Those times are now dead and forgotten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
25. This is a very bad idea. How independant can a government funded media be?
People do not bite the hand that feeds them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Commonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
26. Again, you seem to be on the wrong side of history.
You seem to do that a lot.
It's too bad, because you also seem to be quite sincere.
But you are on the wrong side of history.
Most people do not want government funded media.
Most people do not want government funded anything.
It's a bad idea for many reasons.
And it's such a 20th century way of thinking.
Besides, we've got something SO MUCH better already, if we would just use it properly.
Something SO MUCH more effective, although we've let the big-money guys practically take it over, nearly from the start.
Mainly because we are, for the most part, a lazy species.
You know, it's that .org after your name there.
I don't want my tax dollars going to your .org, but I'm certainly willing to donate to Democratic Underground, as an example, because I consider it to be one of the best places on the internet for me to find news.
Granted, DU doesn't finance the original reporting, but there's certainly a way to get that paid for without making Rupert Murdoch richer, or without tax dollars.
C'mon, think outside the box, get with the program, move into the 21st century.
And realize that, good or bad, right or wrong, statements and ideas like "We Need Government Funded Media" are going to be met with a lot of resistance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nyc 4 Biden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
27. great op!
the Nation had a great article relating to this as well.

How to Save the News
by WILLIAM F. BAKER
This article appeared in the October 12, 2009 edition of The Nation.
September 23, 2009

snip
"Total federal support for American public broadcast media in 2007 was about $480 million. That might seem sufficient or even impressive until you compare it with the BBC, which serves a nation with one-fifth the US population but which received the equivalent of $5.6 billion in government money in 2007. When it comes to public media, the United States is decisively outspent by the governments of most other major democracies. Japan, whose population is less than half the size of the United States', spent the equivalent of $6.8 billion for public broadcasting in 2007; Germany, with one-third the size, spent about $11 billion; and Canada, a tenth the size, spent $898 million. Even Denmark and Ireland, with populations smaller than New York City, far outspent the United States per capita, with respective budgets equivalent to $673 million and $296 million."

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091012/baker/single
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbdo2007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
28. So "government funded" - you mean media that will cater to whichover govt. is in office to keep
their funding?

Bad idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kudzu22 Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
29. There's no such thing as independent
media. They will be loyal to whomever is paying their salaries. The free press is supposed to keep the government in check. How are they going to do that if they're dependent on the same government they're supposed to be watching?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
31. FSTV ...donor sponsored news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timeforpeace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
32. "I said publicly FUNDED, not government CONTROLLED" You know better than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kudzu22 Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-08-10 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Funding = Control
You don't do what they want, no more funding. That's control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-09-10 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
34. PBS is now playing "Bonanza" reruns in my area!! Thanks to privatization ...
GOP long, long, long ago co-opted our public broadcasting stations and radio --

PBS -- Petroleum Broadcasting System -- !! ExxonMobil!!

GOP put a private corporation -- Corporation for Public Broadcasting -- in charge of

public TV!!!

Until everything is animated violent cartoons, the right wing won't rest!!

We could try licenses -- every family buys a license every year which would support

journalists and a free press consortium????

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC