Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Free Press?

The Press is not free when the reporters are employed and paid to follow orders and directives as to what they can and cannot tell "news" consumers.

This is how the corporate "mainstream" media has so easily become not-free (the Constitution says that there CAN be a "free press", but doesn't forbid a non-free press... duh).

Simply, really, reporters are hired according to ideology and willing submission to being controlled as to what they'll say and not say to us. Effectively they're propagandists masquerading as "journalists". False advertising, pretty much, claiming to be scrupulous, honest and trustworthy, while really not being so.

The truly free press does, however, exist. Example: Once upon a time FOX News was basically truly free (though it's become less and less so as it came under the control of those with an agenda to impart a specific narrative and ideology, to censor inconvenient questions and evidence, etc). But we still have the NEW MEDIA, which is as free as its owners/directors want it to be. How free the various NEW MEDIA entities are depends on those in control of them. We can judge for ourselves by patronizing them all over time and seeing whether they're truly free or too submissive to intimidation by forces who don't want them to tell us truthful stuff or show us real evidence some forces find very inconvenient.

1 comment:

skvitt said...

I'm a swede man, excuse my no good english.

But I have to say I agree about media. Ofcours it's not free. First of all, they hav to writw about things most people whant to reed, but also write in a way that advertisers like. Otherwise they don't adverse.

And, ofcourse, the papers owners are capialists and don't wont to write about things that not suport capitalism.

I wrote this about media and censore and hope you are able to read it:

I whish you and all your reders a good new year!