3 ms·

> The government can't fund newspapers without the perception of state bias. The government itself can not do this, but it could demand that there is a neutral

by okket 7y ago

> The government can't fund newspapers without the perception of state bias. The government itself can not do this, but it could demand that there is a neutral news organisation which is allowed to collect the necessary money to function from its citizen, like the public broadcasting system in several countries. This would help as a somewhat trusted ground source, IMHO.

bpicolo 7y ago
I'm not sure how U.K. views the BBC, but it seems to be an effective example of this model.
- jdietrich 7y ago
  A small minority bitterly resent the license fee and/or believe that the BBC are just a propaganda wing of whichever political party they dislike; the vast majority regard it as a beloved national institution. In a poll by Ipsos Mori, 59% of respondents named the BBC as the one news source they trust the most. That level of trust remains consistent across the political spectrum, with readers of the right-leaning Daily Mail and the left-leaning Guardian both reporting high levels of trust in the BBC. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/58001/bbc-annex2.pdf https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/58001/b...
tonyedgecombe 7y ago
It's hard though, the BBC is often quoted as an example but they have always had to deal with the government of the day trying to exert influence.
pard68 7y ago
Depends on the nation. I suspect it would be fine in a lot of Europe, and is already the case in a lot of Europe I believe. In the former British colonies,and the United States in particular, that wouldn't fly over too well. The US public broadcasting networks are often not news outlets but entertainment sources (kids shows, education, etc). The US and to some extent the rest of the colonies hold a lot more distrust for the government than European nations and a government funded news organization would be considered a government shill. Also, a US government news organization would have to contend with laws which would make it difficult for them to function .
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- matthew349hall 7y ago
  What about NPR?

by okket 7y ago

bpicolo 7y ago

I'm not sure how U.K. views the BBC, but it seems to be an effective example of this model.

jdietrich 7y ago
A small minority bitterly resent the license fee and/or believe that the BBC are just a propaganda wing of whichever political party they dislike; the vast majority regard it as a beloved national institution. In a poll by Ipsos Mori, 59% of respondents named the BBC as the one news source they trust the most. That level of trust remains consistent across the political spectrum, with readers of the right-leaning Daily Mail and the left-leaning Guardian both reporting high levels of trust in the BBC. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/58001/bbc-annex2.pdf https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/58001/b...

tonyedgecombe 7y ago

It's hard though, the BBC is often quoted as an example but they have always had to deal with the government of the day trying to exert influence.

pard68 7y ago

Depends on the nation. I suspect it would be fine in a lot of Europe, and is already the case in a lot of Europe I believe. In the former British colonies,and the United States in particular, that wouldn't fly over too well. The US public broadcasting networks are often not news outlets but entertainment sources (kids shows, education, etc). The US and to some extent the rest of the colonies hold a lot more distrust for the government than European nations and a government funded news organization would be considered a government shill. Also, a US government news organization would have to contend with laws which would make it difficult for them to function .

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
matthew349hall 7y ago
What about NPR?