4 ms·

If we take that position then how is that reconcilable with democracy?

shadowgovt 6y ago
Traditionally, it's been extremely reconcilable. News agencies had a responsibility to be more accurate than not. The government itself keeps a very hands-off approach to that information flow, and the people reward papers that succeed with subscriptions and eyeballs. This detente is why the media has traditionally been referred to as "The fourth estate." Unclear what the solution is as that system breaks down because the subscription-free ad-fueled Internet dwarfs the traditional model.
- Fjolsvith 6y ago
  Ultimately, people (the audience) will go to sources that are credible and abandon sources that are not, regardless of how the source pays their bills.
scarmig 6y ago
Hypothetically, you can think that you need institutions to properly frame and prioritize issues in public discourse, and only then is democracy ideal. And at some scale it's true: if a bunch of us were suddenly dropped into a locked room and told to discuss and then vote for the best mayor of Mumbai with no resources, we'd fail. Democracy isn't looking too healthy nowadays though, I agree.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
Making some assumptions about what you mean by "democracy", that's actually a good question. We believe in freedom of expression because we don't want the government suppressing information for the purpose of manipulating us, but in the information age it has become obvious that one can manipulate people by spreading information just as easily as by suppressing it. For this reason, I am forced to wonder if democracy can survive the information age at all.
syshum 6y ago
You cant, that is why the US is not a democracy nor should it become one The US is a constitutional republic who's institution where designed in a way that the ONLY democratic part of that system of governance was the US House of representatives Unfortunately for those that like individual freedom and see democracy as mob rule (people like myself) there is a strong push for more and more democracy into the system which is a net negative for individual liberty. Things like abolishing of electoral collage, even past changes like Electing Senators via Popular vote have been a net negative for liberty

Traditionally, it's been extremely reconcilable. News agencies had a responsibility to be more accurate than not. The government itself keeps a very hands-off approach to that information flow, and the people reward papers that succeed with subscriptions and eyeballs. This detente is why the media has traditionally been referred to as "The fourth estate." Unclear what the solution is as that system breaks down because the subscription-free ad-fueled Internet dwarfs the traditional model.

Fjolsvith 6y ago
Ultimately, people (the audience) will go to sources that are credible and abandon sources that are not, regardless of how the source pays their bills.

scarmig 6y ago

Hypothetically, you can think that you need institutions to properly frame and prioritize issues in public discourse, and only then is democracy ideal. And at some scale it's true: if a bunch of us were suddenly dropped into a locked room and told to discuss and then vote for the best mayor of Mumbai with no resources, we'd fail. Democracy isn't looking too healthy nowadays though, I agree.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

Making some assumptions about what you mean by "democracy", that's actually a good question. We believe in freedom of expression because we don't want the government suppressing information for the purpose of manipulating us, but in the information age it has become obvious that one can manipulate people by spreading information just as easily as by suppressing it. For this reason, I am forced to wonder if democracy can survive the information age at all.

syshum 6y ago

You cant, that is why the US is not a democracy nor should it become one The US is a constitutional republic who's institution where designed in a way that the ONLY democratic part of that system of governance was the US House of representatives Unfortunately for those that like individual freedom and see democracy as mob rule (people like myself) there is a strong push for more and more democracy into the system which is a net negative for individual liberty. Things like abolishing of electoral collage, even past changes like Electing Senators via Popular vote have been a net negative for liberty