Our Constitution guarantees freedom of the press. This means that our media is free to report the news with whatever slant they wish. They are free to emphasize certain facts and events and omit others. They are even free to lie and act like churlish children. Our courts have even ruled that our media can disclose government secrets if it is "in the national interest."
However, the media's freedom, like any freedom, is not absolute. This freedom does not stand ahead of freedom of speech or freedom of assembly ... also in the First Amendment to the Constitution. If the media tries to suppress other constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, then they have stepped over the line and need to be reminded of their transgressions. I suppose that they can't be rightfully stopped ... but they can be reminded by others with communication outlets to the people (Trump) of their failings. It will then he up to the people to decide. If the people give a media outlet the thumbs down, then that outlet can either self-correct or go out of business. This is the ultimate democracy ... people using their free market decisions if any media outlet has moved onto the dark side.
It would only be an unconstitutional infringement if our government tried to influence this process with funds or favors. If our government were to fund its own radio (NPR) or television (PBS) stations, then this would certainly be unconstitutional. No?
2 comments:
Despite the generally progressive nature of the programming on NPR/PBS, I find their NEWS reportage the least biased of any media outlet.
Still, I agree with you that the Government should not fund public networks.
Perhaps just more subtitle bias?
Post a Comment