Brown: Will The News Media Be Neutered?

[Terri]

By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown
January 10, 2008

Connecticut is considering a bailout for local papers. But government assistance always comes with a catch. In the case of government aid of newspapers, it will destroy the ability of those papers to function as watchdogs. As journalism professor Paul Janensch told Reuters, "You can't expect a watchdog to bite the hand that feeds it." That's why the news out of Connecticut is very disturbing.

Two small-town papers have been in danger of being shut down because of decreasing revenue and poor management decisions. Journal Register Corp. recently had to sell the two papers, The Bristol Press and The (New Britain) Herald. Without a buyer, the alternative would have been to close the papers.

More

[papajaxxx]

Newspapers must adapt and survive without government assistance or else one of the foundations of our free society will crumble.

With the internet, why do you need a small town paper anyway?

All bailouts are socialism-in-action. And, we know socialism does not work in any form or fashion...it only gives a quick-fix that costs you a lot more further down the road.

Let all newspapers go the way of the stagecoach as far as I am concerned. If they are not needed, why keep 'em?

[Charie]

The preservation of America's democracy has long relied on a free and fiercely independent press. Newspapers play a crucial role in investigations of government corruption. Elections become meaningless when information is not accessible regarding government officials and their activities.

Emphasis mine.

Do the Browns actually think the newspapers are giving Obama the same sort of attention that George Bush has gotten for the past 8 years?

If they weren't so bent, they may have spent less money on trying to dig up dirt on conservatives and the president.

The Browns are correct about the newspapers being in the pocket of whoever leads the charge to give them money.

Didn't anyone ever hear about "freedom of the press"?

That's even ahead of the "right to bear arms".

[mikemo]

The (DIMLIB) News Media has absolutely no credibility now, so letting all know they are government owned would be preferable.

[msbobbie]

Papajaxx, small town newspapers are an absolute necessity. About half of the residents in the small town where I live are senior citizens on fixed incomes. Most cannot afford home computers and internet access, nor would they know what to do with it if they could.

The problem I have with our small town paper is they rarely cover any news outside of this rural county except for the Letters to the Editor/Opinion page.

Another thing about small town/big city newspapers is they are more dependent on advertisers than subscribers and guess who controls the advertisers..... the chamber of commerce and guess who the chamber of commerce supports.... socialist democrats.

[Love my Texas]

Why would the government neuter the News Media? The majority of these newspapers, news media are liberal socialist who cater to the Obama clan and Democratic party, so no sweat. And, they are probably the only ones needing a handout. Gee, I really want my tax $$ going to this bunch of fools.

The preservation of America's democracy has long relied on a free and fiercely independent press. Newspapers play a crucial role in investigations of government corruption.

The only corruption the free and fiercely independent press investigates are the Republicans. Another lie written by the press. So much corruption concerning the Demos that never get as newsworthy as a Republican doing wrong.

[Rubicon]

Will The News Media Be Neutered?
Not knowing the content of many of those small town papers, perhaps this is unfair.
However, based on the overall performance of many of this nations "news" outlets, be it print or electronic, neutering is the last thing they need fear.
While there are those who fecklessly try to imply the media is controlled by conservatives, any who deal in actual reality know the media is decidedly liberal.
I agree government money does not belong in this industry. Its just too convenient for power brokers to exploit beyond what they are already doing & what they are already doing is considerable.
It is ironic that many in the media who are losing readers, viewers, or listeners, simply do NOT get it. They have been losing their customer base for decades.
Advertisers are seeking "new" venues such as the internet. And it is obvious the internet reaches more, more often, w/ more information, than any other medium available. Customers can also design, control, & modify their own content so they can adapt at a moments notice as opposed to other media venues. This is critical if advertisers want to sell quickly.
Obviously, the "old media" venues have failed to realize they lose customers for many reasons & most significant among those are the patently biased content spoon fed to their customers daily.
I loved my small town paper when it was still in existence. It told of our town & that was special. But they did not make enough money to remain viable. Many regional consolidations allowed editors to try to tailor area news in their regional paper operations. Only time will tell if this is a successful model.
Our biggest concerns here are, stop spending money on failing enterprises. If they are failing & cannot adapt, then they should fail & that is the way business works. But the next concern is one of serious importance.
The plans I see developing are government plans to interfere in or "edit" internet content.
The danger should be obvious to any & all. Once the government or special interests who control the bureaucracy, gain control of the process of the internet, all press freedom or information freedom, will be lost.
We fast approach the day when bureaucrats, whose political positions will be determined by those in power, will determine content. Even Nancy Pelosi spoke of "editing" internet content. Of course she also spoke of "balancing" the messages on talk radio. For any who do not understand political doublespeak, this means silencing Conservative talk radio because it is way too powerful for our socialist brothers & sisters. They literally HATE Rush Limbaugh & others like him. While their opinions are their own, their control of the content is NOT theirs to do with as "they" decide. Content is to be driven by consumer demand alone. And that is what liberals hate.
Liberal talk radio was, is, & will always probably be, an immense & abysmal failure. The message is pathetic & most do not want to hear propaganda venomously spewed at them at all hours of the day & night.
Rush may be out of order. BUT, the listener can easily change the channel. Radio content cannot offend through viewing before one can change the channel. Only listeners can be offended & that can happen via any medium.
The concept of "balance" in Pelosi's mind & that of others seeking to silence the Rush's of the world, will amount to silencing him. They do not want balance, they want control. They will use government intimidation to accomplish this. If they can do this to the radio, you can bet they can easily do it to the internet.
We had better fight back when it comes to the "Fairness Doctrine" & other attempts to silence opposition views. If we let them do it to radio, they will definitely follow up & do it to the internet.
The irony is, the world is becoming freer because of the internet while here in America, socialists plan to crush our freedoms under the false pretense of balance & fairness. They forget to mention balance & fairness was to be judged by them & no one else.
God help us, our politicians, limited special interest groups, & wealthy altruists are not. We face the real possibility our current crop of "leaders" will sell off our freedom while they temporarily bask in their power & wealth, before despots take freedom from all. The despots might be power hungry socialists or they may be radical religious groups, or a combination of both, but they are working their plans now & they are spending big bucks to make their coup d'etat of mankind possible.

[badorgan]

The government has no right controlling any business, but if the business asks for a bailout, they should be willing to accept the interference when they accept the money. There is no such thing as neutrality in the print media. Each city, town, village newspaper has its own political agenda just as the big guys do. Freedom of speech is talked about, it just isn't practiced in the press.

[Gumbi]

The news media has long been a prostitute for the liberal agenda and given preferential coverage to Democrats in politics, so what's the difference in whether they're neutered or not?

Anyone who might believe that we still have (and I gag on the words) a "free and fiercely independent press" needs only to look at the media through the prism of their own words:

"We are going to impose our agenda, on the coverage, by dealing with issues and subjects that we choose to deal with." -- Richard M. Cohan, Senior Producer of CBS political news

"It is easier to find moderate Muslims who are willing to speak out than to find journalists who will pay much attention to what they have to say. Afghans, Iraqis and Lebanese struggling for liberty and democracy are given short shrift because to give them proper credit would be to give indirect credit to George W. Bush." —Jack Kelly

John Swinton, the former Chief of Staff for the New York Times, was one of America's best known and loved newspapermen. Called "The Dean of his Profession," John was asked, in 1953, to give a toast, before the New York Press Club, and in so doing made a monumentally important and revealing statement. He is quoted as follows: "There is no such thing, at this date of world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you, who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know, beforehand, that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion, out of the paper, I am connected with. Others, of you, are paid weekly, similar salaries for similar things, and any of you, who would be so foolish, as to write honest opinions, would be out on the streets, looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions, to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours, my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell this country and his race for his daily bread. You know it, and I know it, and what folly is this, toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men, behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."

"Are you watching this? Bush makes me sick. If he uses the 'mixed messages' line one more time, I'm going to puke," -John R. Green Producer ABC News in an e-mail from John.R.Green@abc.com 9/30/04

"We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that." -Mark Halperin, Political Director ABC News 10/8/04

"Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have. " -- Richard Salant, former President of CBS News

"We are going to impose our agenda, on the coverage, by dealing with issues and subjects that we choose to deal with." - - Richard M. Cohan, Senior Producer of CBS political news

“Well, our job is to bash the President, that’s what we do...” -- Newsweek’s Evan Thomas

Any questions? Didn't think so..... Oh, and just for fun, let's see if Evan Thomas still thinks that bashing the President is his job after January 20th..... Yeah, Right!!

[OldTom]

Why worry?
The MSM is so liberal and so infatuated as to be in bed with "The One" and his minions that it should make lttle difference who supports them.
Even the opinions of the local news should be taken with a grain of salt because of its liberalism. Just learn and know the facts and read what you will with a jaded eye from several sources.
That's all you can hope for.