Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Local newspapers are already closing en masse even with ads, and many of the ones left barely count as newspapers anymore. We need to solve this issue separately. Maybe start rolling out straight-up subsidies? That would open up local newspapers to government censorship, but that's not necessarily worse than newspapers ruled by adspace buyers, and generally better than no local newspaper at all.
The Corporation For Public Broadcasting (RIP) did a good job of helping NPR, PBS, etc stay impartial and relevant.
Impartial?
NPR hasn't been impartial in my lifetime. See also the radio programs the US projected to the rest of the world (I forget the name of it) - essentially a propaganda arm of the government..
Government should have zero involvement with such stuff.
You may disagree, but the intent and practice of NPR has always been to remain impartial as a news source. The lack of a profit motive encourages this, whereas other media organizations rely on catering to their desired audience. Maybe you don’t like what you hear there, but consider the motivation of any news org before judging it.
As far as the propaganda aimed at other countries, I can’t speak to it as I’m ignorant in this area.