Lucifuge Rofocalespreading the message
The problem is, what are you supposed to do about it without violating the First Amendment?
Stop using sources that push propaganda? Support independent journalists like 404 media & use fediverse social media?
no I think I’ll just stay on tiktok and twitter. thats where my friends are after all. (this is not an attack on you specifically but your argument is used like this all the time, there are reputable alternatives to mainstream media.)
Actually, I don’t think you understood my argument.
I’m not asking about what individual members of the public are supposed to do, I’m asking what lawmakers are supposed to do. I’m talking about beyond a mere boycott, which (as you yourself just pointed out) is a losing strategy.
If i ran the administration with a majority, the first stop would be the FCC to create legislation towards free and fair reporting that actually gets enforced, with punishment based on percentage of profit instead of flat rate fines. Monopoly of information laws should also be created via the FCC.
I do not though so. here we are :P
free and fair reporting
Thats not possible as long as the media is owned by oligarchs. Everything is propaganda; the effect of choosing which aspects if a story to emphasize and what context to include is a zero-sum game as far as shaping public perception.
percentage of profit
Most media are loss makers. By funding it, oligarchs are able reinforce a system that keeps the money flowing into their bank accounts.
“A perfect world is not possible so we should do nothing”
Your comment is propaganda thats trying to show the negative aspect of regulating a medium when the only thing to be gained from giving this viewpoint without a solution is defeatism.
and if you think Fox News is losing money I have a bridge to sell you.
Who said we should do nothing? We should recognize all reporting is biased, and democratize media so its biased towards us, the working class.
So youre saying the same thing I said, except you think its different because of saying the FCC you said the working class.
Do you have an actual working implementation of how media can be democratized by the working class? Are we voting on if news is true? How would this work in practice? I am not going to completely dismiss your argument but I am failing to see the vision.
democratized by the working class
Yes, nationalize billionaire-owned media, set up oversight boards appointed by the media workers and state. Restrict salaries of pundits, writers, editors etc such that they can’t exceed the median income.
We’ve seen what the FCC trying to implement fairness looks like. Requiring two perspectives, both aligned against the interests of the workers, wasn’t productive.
But what I said is practically the same thing. The difference is I chose to say we should re-utilize the FCC (which is what theyre there for) instead of creating a whole new thing for this. I did not say to bring back the bullshit that was fairness doctrine. I did not mention nationalizing media, because while I think there should be a nationalized news source, you can’t trust a Trump-like figure not to go in and take complete control of a single nationalized news source. In a perfect world I would agree with you entirely. We do not live in one.
you can’t trust a Trump-like figure not to go in and take complete control of a single nationalized news source
The status quo, where “trump-like figures” own any media of consequence, is not meaningfully different from your worst-case scenerio of a “trump-like figure” taking over the media.
The bourgeois fund the media and make sure people who are ideologically aligned with them are promoted because it promotes their interests, we would see the same backlash whether they are stripped of control by the FCC or nationalization. I figure cutting them out entirely leaves fewer avenues for them to influence their media.