I am wondering what peoples thoughts are surrounding the idea that all national news should be considered News and not entertainment, and as such any National News should be illegal to hide behind a paywall, subscription, etc. If you claim you are broadcasting news, then it is vital to the population and should be free. Putting an enter your email here/subscription/payment for this should be made it unconstitutional as it is withholding information vital to the people about their country and how to make proper decisions on how to act.

If you post something inaccurate about news you should be held liable based off the number of views. 1% of the population saw it, that's the percentage of your companies wealth you are fined. 58% of the population saw it, you should be fucked, and never be able to afford the same mistake again.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 2 days ago

In regards to requiring news coverage to be free, one has to ask how then do those who collect, edit/review, verify, and ultimately report on the news get paid? More, invasive, and disruptive advertising? Some sort of national or state news coverage grant program funded by the tax payers? Some other funding system? While I'm sure some way could be found to make it "work", you have to consider what impact those who hold the purse strings have over the quality, accuracy, and political leaning of the news being reported.

My point being that there are knock-on effects from trying to legislate something like that and depending on the chosen path there can be additional knock-on effects as well as potentially troubling cons (like giving a government agency far too much control over the content of news being reported) that need to be carefully considered.

Such a system would also likely need to allow for exceptions for smaller publications, such as with small, local newspapers or trade/special-interest publications with limited viewership that wouldn't be able to get enough from advertisers or qualify for any grant programs.

As for levying fines for posting inaccuracies, that again sounds nice in theory until you consider scenarios like honest mistakes or quickly evolving news stories where all the facts haven't been fully resolved at the time of reporting where it's practically impossible for reporters to be able to report a fully accurate story for days, weeks, or months later. Reporters also rely on others to give them accurate facts. Of course, reporters and their editors must be as diligent as possible in vetting their sources and verifying the facts, but there's always a chance that what seemed to be a good source turned out to be bad, or worse intentionally misleading and that's not caught before publication.

Perhaps if you limit such fines to knowingly inaccurate and misleading reporting then I think that might be workable, with the understanding that this will be creating or tasking an existing government agency with the job of investigating news reports for accuracy. If not properly setup and insulated such an agency could again be used by the government to restrict press freedom rather than enforce the actual accuracy of the news.

  • source