(04-20-2022, 02:53 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(04-20-2022, 01:48 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Yeah, I don't know, man. That's a tough one. The media is such a tricky topic. You don't want to censor free speech, but you have to have something that works for the people. I think, for starters, we need to make our media non-profit in order to be called news. There can be opinion pieces and shows, but they can't be on news stations and make money. These groups can only refer to themselves as tabloids or entertainment. The fact that our media works for profit from corporations is a HUGE conflict of interest, and I think making this type of distinction would be a good start. I'd also like it to be mandatory that any retraction be permanently affixed to a scrolling chyron, front page of the website, and given adequate news coverage with the person responsible for getting the information incorrect. 

I have been really toying around with the idea of a no-confidence voting protocol in our general elections. It's still in its infancy stage, but I think there's something to it. We need to have some way to remove people who are not working for us. I don't think we need to vote for our public journalists, but I would like to be able to remove them via a vote. Maybe, when we do our federal elections, we can add votes of no-confidence for our journalists/editors of public news outlets that seem too opinionated or playing lose with the facts. A simple majority vote of no-confidence would cause the editor or journalist to be fired. That probably wouldn't work in our current political climate, but I think we need to be thinking more in that direction. 

As for the government, we have the tools, but we don't use them. We really need to fix the way we vote.

I'm on board with requiring news to be not for profit, but I will note the impact of that is probably small.  Look at hospitals, there is not much difference in financial behavior between the supposedly not for profit ones when compared to the for profit ones.  Conglomerates accumulate debt to conglomerate further, etc.

The rest of what you wrote seems dubious to me.  I don't think there should be any kind of license to be a journalist or pundit, and if there's no license, there's nothing to revoke.

Fixing the way we vote, to me that's the main thing.  We really need to get into the weeds on that.

Our legislature is even showing severe signs of decay recently.  Just writing blank checks for the governor and following him like hired lackeys as he chases more and more fox news headlines.  It's not supposed to work like that!

How can we get better legislators?

I'd require them to be licensed, just as other professions that can do considerable damage due to incompetency, deceit or fraud can. Lawyers, medical providers, electricians, plumbers, teachers, mechanics, etc. It makes no sense for someone to major in journalism cause they couldn't cut it in other programs (and I personally know 6 local journalists who fit this description) and then them having the ability to spread disinformation/lies without the possibility of any recourse against them. Other professions have the ability to restrict/remove the ability of members to practice thier profession if done in an irresponsible manner. It would weed out the outright liars, which would be most of the staff at CNN, NYT, WaPo and some at Fox.

---