Would a government bailout of journalism destroy the free press?

Topic:
Policy Debates

18 Contributors
in this discussion.

Yes
67% of users

  • A free press cannot be beholden to the government in any way.

    If journalists become beholden to the government, for money or for anything else, they cease to be free. It becomes much harder to criticize government spending, for example, if you are a beneficiary of it. By the same token, the risk of losing these funds creates a chilling effect on any reporting that is critical of the government, as a whole, or of the politicians within it.

    Yes P4cBran

  • Yes, because everything has a cost and a government bailout would imply obligations, real or imagined, that would destroy freedom of the press.

    The issue here is not whether a bailout would mean the government actually exerts power or influence over the press, more than it does now, but what the public perception would be. A government bailout of journalism would end free press, because of the implications of that bailout. If I give you money, chances are there are strings attached, and I want something in return. The question everyone would be asking is what? What does the government want in return? Perception is reality. In this case, the perception would be that free press was over, and so it would be.

    Yes MindlessDominick98

  • A government bailout of the larger journalism industry would destroy the free press as we know it, because it would inherently hinder its freedom.

    A government bailout of the journalism sector would not cure the woes of the sector, but would merely work to hinder press freedom. The journalism sector is undergoing a sea of change in the way news is consumed by the public at large. This sea of change is caused by technology, not by a lack of funds flowing into the sector.

    Yes C0n5tGet

  • In order to have a free press, it needs the least government interference or assistance possible.

    Money is a powerful motivator. Bailing out the media or journalists may make them indebted, even subconsciously, and alter their perception of the governments actions. This can skew reports in favor of the government. If money had not been involved, the journalists wouldn't feel this obligation. There is already too much outside influence on mainstream media; we are losing good investigative journalism. An influx of government money to journalists would make this even worse.

    Yes 54IInferno

  • The most important function of journalism is the ability to report independently on the actions of government.

    The most important role of the free press is to remain independent from government and to provide the people with unbiased reporting on their actions. Government bailouts are inevitably tied to oversight, as government micromanages the financial operations of failing industries. A government bailout of the press would lead to government management of the reported content. While perhaps not a deliberate attempt to prevent reporting, oversight of spending would result in control of the decisions of what to report, and when. The free press must remain autonomous to perform its function.

    Yes N3r0nKrooI

  • A government bailout of journalism would destroy the free press, because it would then be subject to the government's regulations and would not be free.

    A government bailout would give the government the upper hand in regulating the press. The press should be free and not subject to such a higher authority. The press is going through an evolution with the changing electronic environment. Once the press adjusts to the changes, it will be able to get back on its feet, rather than depending on the government.

    Yes EImerN4th

  • Yes, a government bailout of journalism would destroy the free press because the government would than be telling them what to print and what to say.

    Yes, a government bailout of journalism would destroy the free press because than the government would be telling the papers what to print and what to say. If people don't read the papers than they should go out of business. The government should not be involved in any private businesses.

    Yes MycCra2ii

  • Citizen journalism is often unreliable and misleading; mainstream journalism is essential to protect the integrity of news.

    Citizen journalism has a tendency to be unreliable and misleading. Of course there are plenty of citizen journalists who are ethical in their reporting, source all of their information, and are on par with journalistic professionals. But there are also a lot of citizen journalists who don't bother to double-check their facts, or worse, who intentionally or recklessly promote completely unverified facts. The mechanisms in place for the mainstream media to ensure that information is accurate and news stories are reliable are invaluable. Mainstream journalism will always be necessary to ensure that the news is credible and believable. Citizen journalism is an important piece of the news landscape, but it cannot be the only piece.

    Yes A Bass

  • I believe it would, since journalists would feel indebted tot he government.

    If somehow the journalism industry found itself in big enough trouble to warrant a government bailout, it could destroy the freedom of the press, or free press, to a certain extent because journalists might feel indebted to the government and therefore be less critical than they might be otherwise. Additionally, if the government bailed out the journalism industry, the government would essentially be considered its boss, and could select what is appropriate and what is not.

    Yes PinkMych

  • Yes, a government bail out of journalism would destroy the free press.

    The whole notion of a free-press is that it operates under freedom. If big newspapers or media outlets were bailed out by the government, that could give incentives to the government to demand what is reported, what is questioned, and what isn't. This private-public relationship as a result of a bailout would be detrimental to a free republic that promotes a free press..

    Yes D Callahan

  • If the government is providing money, they always seem to want to say how it should be run.

    Congress has a history of wanting to have a say in how things are done if the government provides funding. It would be VERY tempting for Congress to want to make helpful suggestions on how the institutions receiving funds should handle certain policies. I fear this would lead to government having a control of the newspapers. This would NOT be good for a free press.

    Yes ddeathnote

  • I do not believe that there is a place for government in the free press.

    Interference with the press by the government in any way, including bailouts, is not a good idea. Our free press is guaranteed by the Constitution. Without the free press, the people would not be informed of many things that the government is doing, and we certainly need someone who is watching what our elected officials are doing and informing the public. If the free press received a government bailout, I am afraid that the government would expect to have some control of our media.

    Yes R0d0Ferdy
Voice Your Opinion
No
33% of users

  • I am of the opinion that true journalism will continue in the free press regardless of who their financiers are.

    Organizations which truly are members of what we refer to as the free press are going to continue writing with journalistic integrity regardless of who finances their business model. I think this is demonstrated by the press elements which are funded by private organizations, yet are willing to write about the failures of the places where their funding comes from. Also, I doubt the government finds the press so important that it must be bailed out.

    No ColdEmmanuel92

  • I support a government bailout of journalism because freedom of the press should not be limited by revenue taken in or financial burdens.

    We already have government supported journalism in our NPR programs and that has not killed the free press. If anything a government bailout of journalism would only guarantee that all sides are heard, not just the news agency with the most money.

    No FascinatedErich52

  • No a government bailout of journalism would not destroy the free press because the government already has as much control as they could possibly want over the press.

    The government can and has already controlled what the free press can say through threatening to remove their journalistic licenses. The government has tons of ways to pressure the news reporters into doing what they want, usually threatening their right to broadcast or publish their stories. A bailout will not really change anything about how modern news is reported.

    No H_Baird

  • I do not think the government can control the press.

    The government would hold no upper hand if they bailed out the press. The press is still going to print what they want to print when they want to print it. Government control would bring us to a point where there would be protests of free press. Whether what the press writes is true or not, it still brings publicity and light to things that may need to be seen, positive or not. I can not see the government gaining any control.

    No WillowsErv

  • Why would government need to bailout the free press?

    We have the world wide web. The WWW is the new free press. Anyone and everyone who has access to the Internet is the new free press. Free press in no longer about making money off stories about everything; it's about getting the truth out. We all have the right to be informed without having to pay to hear the truth.

    No SlipArnal

  • No, it doesn't have to, at all.

    A government bailout does not have to have an influence on the freedom of the press. Whether, or not, it does is dependent on everyone involved and the final terms, which are agreed upon. The government would be completely wrong to limit the freedoms of a certain press because they have bailed that certain press out. And, that certain press does not have to agree to such terms.

    No MohaI0v35
Voice Your Opinion

Related Debates

Debate Topics

 
 
Would a government bailout of journalism destroy the free press?
Top of Page
© 2010 Juggle, LLC
All Rights Reserved
Encyclopedia & Reference Resource