Thoughtful opinion piece about the state of our news media, from one of NewsTrust's own citizen editors, Julian Friedland. The author presents fair and factual information, and makes a reasonable argument that journalism be treated as a vital public service, funded in part from tax dollars as the BBC and its european counterparts (rather than outsourcing it to commercial ventures that care more about serving their shareholders than the public interest).

This opinion piece deftly explains the ills of American news media and points to the European solution. However, it fails to consider other options to ensure the vibrancy of the fourth estate.

Ok, full disclosure: I'm the author. But it's an issue I've been frustrated not to see discussed lately by anyone in the mainstream. And it's an problem dear to NewsTrust members, though I argue it's ultimately doubtful they can solve it themselves.

Remember the 1940s films about newspapers? The journalist/hero had integrity, was concerned with "the public's right to know". Not with writing to the grandmother with a third grade education. Could it be that our educational system and business model, neither of which values critical thinking, has influenced the dumbing down of the news into shock, ain't it a shame, and Paris Hilton? Seems to me a 7% return to stockholders should be sufficient, IF informing the public were valued.

The editorial starts with a false premise, "the mission of the media is to inform" No the mission of the media is to sell advertising. What they publish to attract the adverser is up to them. This editorial is a plea by the enlightened class for special treatment. The wheels are coming off the newspaper industry's business model and rather than fix it, the author wants the taxpayers to fund this broken model. (Think First Amendment problems) Economists call this rent seeking. The author rails against subsidies for agriculture, textiles and other rent seekers yet he thinks his mission, educate and enlighten as he choses to do it is worthy of such subsidy. He illustrates his "demand" for subsidies by citing the success of the ... More »

No it is opinion on journalism. Per the Congress, this term, journalism is anyone that wants to write can claim it is a public service and protected speech. I think the problem as I see it is we are filled to the brim with commentary - the public is not allowed to think due to the rapid fire pace of "opinions". Everyone has an opinion on something - is it proper to label my opinion as "journalism" because I write it in a blog... or a op-ed column in a paper?

This author completely misses the point of why the "media" is private and is provided the right to remain free in the Constitution. The private nature of the media allows it to operate outside and not be beholden to the Government. The author truly believes that "government" wont itself act in its on self interest once it starts to provide funds to the media. Government will demand and coerce "media" to report what it wants, how it wants and will stop negative reports about itself. The detailed investigative reporting the author wishes for will be completely lost as the media becomes just another arm of the Government. She should really think through her premise and its obvious logical outcome before writing an article and ... More »

Good distinction between shareholders and (additional) stakeholders. Consideration of all stakeholders -- including, among others, the public and company employees -- is central to ethical decision-making, but too many media companies are heavily weighting their loyalties. The result is not only harmful to the public but threatens their own long-term survival.

I have said many times that the media has lost the focus of it's true mission which is to educate as well as to inform. Very well-written and insightful. VERUM AVERSAS MUNDAS!