From Town Criers to Bloggers: How Will Journalism Survive the Internet Age?
I am totally against anything that abrogates or minimizes or circumvents the 1st Amendment to our Constitution. I didn't realize that journalism (real journalism, that is) needed to be "reinvented," but leave it to Obama's government to propose "solutions" where there are no problems. The whole idea is control... the more the government owns, the more it controls, and the less freedom the American people have. So, it should come as no surprise that Obama's socialist administration has set its focus on the media. In an effort to "save" old media, the administation is proposing a set of "guidelines" that would put the government in more control of the "news" that is delivered to the people. If this doesn't smack of "thought police," I don't know what does The entire supposition is based on the fact that the print media and the rest of the "main stream" media is in financial disarray. The findings totally disregard the fact that this is happening due to market forces that the "main stream" media totally ignores. These being that they are demonstratively biased and opinionated in their "reporting". So much so that the people have stopped reading/watching/listening to them because they realize that they are not getting the truth or straight news but only slanted stuff. So... what is the government proposing to save newspapers? Answer: a whole host of initiatives paid for by you and me which would give the government more control in what "news" is delivered to the people. As noted in a story on FoxNews.com, here are some of the proposals laid out in the "reinventing journalism" document: -- the creation of a "journalism" division of AmeriCorps, the federal program that places 75,000 people with local and national nonprofit groups annually; -- tax credits to news organizations for every journalist employed; -- establishing citizenship news vouchers, which "would allow every American tax payer to allocate some amount of government funds to the non-profit media organization" of their choice; -- increased funding for public radio and television; -- providing grants to universities to conduct investigative journalism; -- increased postal subsidies for newspapers and periodicals; -- a 5 percent tax on consumer electronics, which would generate roughly $4 billion annually, to pay for increased public funding. Sounds typical, doesn't it? Newspapers are struggling, so let's pay for even more "public" radio and television. It's funny (not really) that "public" radio and television actually means government radio and television. Let's pay their postage. Let's pay liberal universities to conduct investigative journalism??? That one is really nuts. And of course, the whole idea of creating a journalism division within AmeriCorps would only lead to the government getting exactly the kind of journalists it wants. Journalism is a JOB!! If there is not a demand for it, then there will be fewer journalists. The government should back-off, and keep it's hands out of it. In addition, the more the government moves into the journalism industry, the more our free speech rights are at risk: I am sorry that this is a bit long but it had to be to explain it correctly. The bottom line is that THERE MUST NOT BE ANY GOVERNMENT BAILOUT OF ANY MORE INDUSTRIES, PARTICULARLY THE "MEDIA"