26 March 2006

What's the Point?

Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,

Someone said to me (under other circumstances), "Until someone can provide some evidence that the government is actively suppressing the press, I can only believe that it is the press monitoring itself for business purposes."

I have to say that when I read that statement I very nearly blew several gaskets. I tried to remind myself that this person is young and probably knows not of what he speaks. But therein lies the problem. He should know of what he speaks.

We've lost our point. Rather the press has lost it's point. They've forgotten that they are not just another business out there to make a buck. In a democracy the press has a job to do. It's their bound duty to report on the government to the people and vice versa. Report on the people to the government. What do "the masses" consider important? What is the government up to? How are they spending our taxes? Just what are they doing? Somehow someone must hold the feet of the government to the fire. It's up to the press to help us do that. Without an independent press who is not monitoring itself for business purposes, we don't have a mouth piece.

We got nothing.

The press doesn't get to act as if it's the auto industry or the steel industry or the clothing industry. Because it's not. It has a significant job to do that those industries do not. They do not contribute to our system of checks and balances in our government. The press does. It carries a significant responsibility and that carries a cost. Boohoo ... too bad. Those who get into it know those costs when they choose it. It's no place to get rich. But then neither is teaching or ministry and people choose those all the time. There are certain professions that one chooses because they carry a certain weight of responsibility and calling. Journalism is one of those professions. Good journalists understand this. They understand their role in our democracy. They also understand that they are not businessmen out to make a buck.

Journalism (or "the press") is an institution which aids in the proper functioning of our democracy. Thus it may not monitor itself for solely business purposes. It has a higher purpose for which it must monitor itself. In addition, the government must not subsidize it. The reasons for that must be obvious and I won't go into that here.

The fact that too few people watch the news and that 36% of 110,000 college students surveyed think that news articles ought to receive government approval before being published is appalling. That should make our Founding Fathers dust roll in their graves. We are living in extremely dangerous times, and that has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorists or Osama binLaden.

Granuaile.

6 comments:

Mike Stavlund said...

What? Oh, no, you didn't!! Did you really say:
"I tried to remind myself that this person is young and probably knows not of what he speaks."

I find this kind of blatant ad hominem to be not only fallacious and uncharitable, but downright unkind. Surely that's not what you mean...

Granuaile said...

Ummm ... not ad hominem.

Not part of the argument. I was describing my reaction to a statement.

Not fallacious ... - He IS young and he revealed his lack of knowledge of how the press is supposed to function in our democracy with his statement.

You may feel it's uncharitable and unkind, but I was just calling a spade a spade ... and since I didn't reveal any names or link this with any other blog I may or may not have, I feel as tho I protected his anonymity pretty well.

[REDACTED] said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
[REDACTED] said...

Sorry, I bit and realized that was stupid.

I just want to say that there is a big difference between calling a spade a spade and calling a spade a spade so therefore it must be a diamond.

It is an ad hominem attack, and you know it.

And it's nice to know that you know exactly how the media, which you are not involved in, should operate. If you can show me when the press has ever actually operated like that, maybe I'll pay some attention to these meaningless and fallacious posts.

See, not much fun, is it?

Sonja Andrews said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Granuaile said...

Okay ... you know that an ad hominem attack is setting up a straw man to divert attention from the real issue in an argument. In this case, I've used an anonymous person to introduce the argument. Therefore, it is not an ad hominem attack. I'll admit that I was clumsy and the writing wasn't good ... but that doesn't make it an ad hominem attack. That just makes it bad writing.

Yes ... you are a diamond (in the rough?)... but for other reasons.

No the press has never operated the way it should. Has anything ever? Wouldn't that be utopia? Or heaven? Does our government? Has it ever? And right now with the government so badly out of balance, we really need the press to be more in balance than ever.

Ahh ... but I don't write for anyone but myself. If anyone pays attention so much the better, but that's not the steam behind my engine.