3 ms·
There is already a sort-of licence. Being employed by a company as a journalist, especially if the company is a recognised media "name". But the people this is
by marcus_holmes 6y ago
There is already a sort-of licence. Being employed by a company as a journalist, especially if the company is a recognised media "name".
But the people this is deliberately not recognising is bloggers. And to be honest, I'm seeing better journalism being done by (some) bloggers than (some) paid journalists now (not their fault - the business model for journalism is a mess, while the model for blogging is working).
- luckylion 6y ago> There is already a sort-of licence. Being employed by a company as a journalist, especially if the company is a recognised media "name". But this obviously fails as seen in this instance (and many others). Companies have interests that do not align with the public's interest of ethical standards. Much like we've generally understood (but unfortunately not really everywhere) that letting other industries regulate themselves isn't a good idea, I don't think it's any different in the media.
- marcus_holmes 6y agoI totally agree. The sooner we can all stop reading ad-funded journalism, the better.