If most of the American News outlets suddenly became state run, what would change? The answer "not much" should scare even those who find themselves in support of the current government.
A free press, like the other rights spelled out in the constitution, requires constant vigilance lest it be stolen or corrupted. If the purpose of journalists, as foreseen in the constitutional guarantee of the freedom of the press, is to investigate and report facts so that the people can make informed decisions, then the press, as it is currently constituted, is no longer free. It is bound by the ideas and constraints of the same fantasies that bind the politicians now in power. Those ideas, as opposed to the desire for truth, will ultimately determine the decisions as to how and what is reported. Much like the junk science of global warming and evolution, which starts with the "right" conclusions, then determines the validity of "scientific" evidence based on those conclusions, the so called mainstream media determines the validity of reality by weather or not it supports the foregone conclusions of its fantasy land.
To be sure, since there is no line that clearly delineate the MSM from the Democrat party, when Democrats are out of control, allegation of a state-run like media would be unfounded. On that same flip-side however, I would not then want a press that went to the people I elected for directions on what to report, nor painted conservatives as the can-do-no-wrong party of a different fantasy land. I, for one, don't like think of myself as quite that naive.
Right vs Real - A longtime friend of mine has always drawn a distinction between "right" and "real". Ask a Christian a plainly-known question like "Are we saved by faith o...