Do You Think the Commercial Media Is Corrupt? Unfair? Biased?

[MineralMan]

16. Here's the thing, though. You can start your own media outlet by

creating and writing a blog. On it, you can write anything you wish. You can even monetize it with advertising, if you like, as one DUer here does and is frequently criticized for doing so. Nobody can force you to stop doing that. If you attract a large enough audience, you can reach a sizable group.

On the other hand, a nationwide television network is a billion dollar enterprise. It's not something an individual can create, unless that individual is a billionaire or can attract enough advertisers to pay for it to operate.

Newspapers and magazines are folding daily and ceasing publication. Why? Because they are not financially sound. Publishing a newspaper is a costly thing to do, and those costs have to be paid. Advertisers have abandoned print media, because it doesn't produce enough results for them in today's consumer economy. You could start a newspaper, but funding it is the problem. Paying your staff, buying paper, printing costs, and much more can't be ignored.

News is expensive. You need reporters on the scene. You need editors. You need photographers and videographers. You need a radio or television station, an expensive, and extensive website, or a printing press to get your news out. There is no news organization that has just one person behind it, and everyone has to be paid.

The founders ensured "freedom of the press," but didn't define what the press was. In those days, the press was some guy in a building with a printing press, like Ben Franklin. Even then, however, someone had to pay for the paper, the ink, the printing press, etc. The population was tiny back in 1776, actually. As it grew, so did the costs of delivering the news.

And yet, the press is still the press. The media are still the media. That hasn't changed. Someone still has to pay for it. The only model that really works is advertising as a means of paying for it. The government can't do it. That would be a conflict of interest, you see. So, the press and media must be independent, but still have to pay for themselves.

There is no free press when it comes to meeting the costs. The only freedom is the freedom to publish what you wish to publish. That is guaranteed. The rest is up to those who deliver the information.