Government Should Stay Out of Media, Let the Press Fend for Itself

Recently White House Communication Director, Anita Dunn, stated that they controlled the press. She attributes that as a major factor of Obama's advantage during the presidential election. It's hard to imagine the new administration as "staying out" of the media now that they are "in" the media. In fact, for them, it's not a matter of staying "in" the media. They want to be the media. They want complete control. They want to dismantle the underpinnings of basic freedoms to allow them that control.

However, here is the problem in terms of traditional media and their desire for subsidization. Traditional media sources, ie, television, radio, newsprint, periodicals, and the owners of mega-conglomerates like Jeff Bewkes (Time Warner), Frank Bennack (Hearst Corp), Samuel Zell (Tribune Company), Robert Iger (Walt Disney), Rupert Murdoch (News Corp), Leslie Moonves (CBS), Jimmy Hays (Cox Enterprises), Jeff Zucker (NBC Universal), Craig Dubow (Gannett Company), Mark Mays (Clear Channel) all find technology such as that of the internet as a leveling of the playing field. They find that their once singular, omnipotent voice is now lost among the cacophany of pontificating "bloggers" and they can blame Drudge as the pioneer that gave bloggers legitimacy.

These owners, seeing their once gleeming flagships reduced to rusting hulks, are looking for protection. However, giving them protection makes as much sense as protecting the wagon idustry from automobile competition. Let's face it, traditional media is a dinosaur and it's days are numbered.

Furthermore, the arguement Downie and Schudson make and where they "argue that government must take a leadership role and subsidize the news gathering process because 'What is paramount is preserving independent, original, credible reporting, whether or not it is profitable, and regardless of the medium in which is appears'" is weak. Who is going to make the subjective analysis of original, credible reporting? The government? That would, in essence, allow the fox to control the chicken coop.

I believe that the second and more compelling interest behind Downie, Schudson, and traditional media owners call for government subsidy is the fear of power loss.

Knowledge is power. They, more than most, understand and are intimately familiar with this concept. They know that if more people go to them for their information then they control knowledge. Control knowledge, control the people.

However, they see the writting on the wall. Subscription rates, viewership, and newstand sales are eroding as more and more people turn to other sources (internet) for their information. Consequently, Owners and their companies are becoming marginalized. Their once iron-fisted influence and ability to form and sway opinions is weakening.

Ben Franklin was astutely aware of this preponderance in the 1700's. Even then, he understood that news/information is the ring in the bull's nose.

David of ID 1:27PM October 20, 2009

Today it's Fox News, but what will tomorrow bring? CBS, ABC, NBC, LA Times. Who will be the next "media watchdog" put on the list for stepping out of line.

Whatever happened to the media keeping an eye on the powerful?

The state of the media is shameful.

Larry of CA 12:53PM October 20, 2009