[p2p-research] Slashdot | Journalists Looking For Government Money

[Paul D. Fernhout]

http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/10/31/137221/Journalists-Looking-For-Government-Money
"We've been following the ongoing struggles of the print media, watching as 
some publications have died off and others have held to outdated principles 
and decried the influence of the internet. A side effect of this has been 
many journalists put out of work and many others fearful that informed 
reporting is on its way out as well. Now, an editorial in the Washington 
Post calls for a solution journalists would likely have scoffed at only a 
few years ago: federal subsidies. Robert W. McChesney and John Nichols 
write, "What to do? Bailing out media conglomerates would be morally and 
politically absurd. These firms have run journalism into the ground. If they 
cannot make it, let them go. Wait for 'pay-wall' technologies, billionaire 
philanthropists or unimagined business models to generate enough news to 
meet the immense demands of a self-governing society? There is no evidence 
that such a panacea is on the horizon. This leaves one place to look for a 
solution: the government." They hasten to add, "Did we just call for 
state-run media? Quite the opposite.""

"Yes, journalists deserve subsidies too"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/22/AR2009102203960.html
"For the first time in American history, we are nearing a point where we 
will no longer have more than minimal resources (relative to the nation's 
size) dedicated to reporting the news. The prospect that this "information 
age" could be characterized by unchecked spin and propaganda, where the 
best-financed voice almost always wins, and cynicism, ignorance and 
demoralization reach pandemic levels, is real. So, too, is the threat to the 
American experiment."

It seems to me like the describe the status quo in mainstream media? :-)

See also: "What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream"
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199710--.htm

More from the Washington post article:
"""
Did we just call for state-run media?
   Quite the opposite. We seek to renew a rich if largely forgotten legacy 
of the American free-press tradition, one that speaks directly to today's 
crisis. The First Amendment necessarily prohibits state censorship, but it 
does not prevent citizens from using their government to subsidize and spawn 
independent media.
   Indeed, the post-colonial press system was built on massive postal and 
printing subsidies. The first generations of Americans never imagined that 
the market would provide sound or sufficient journalism. The notion was 
unthinkable. They established enlightened subsidies, which broadened the 
marketplace of ideas and enhanced and protected core freedoms. Their 
initiatives were essential to America's progress.
   The value of federal journalism subsidies as a percentage of gross 
domestic product in the first half of the 19th century ran, by our 
calculations, to about $30 billion per year in current dollars. It is this 
sort of commitment, established by Jefferson and Madison, that we must 
imagine to address the current crisis.
   That level of subsidy to journalism is found in Scandinavian nations, 
which are among the freest and most democratic in the world.
   Saving newspapers may be impossible. But we can save journalism. Step one 
is to begin debating ways for enlightened public subsidies to provide a 
competitive and independent digital news media. Also, we should greatly 
expand funding for public and community media, and establish policies that 
help convert dying daily newspapers into post-corporate low-profit news 
operations that realize the potential of the Internet. If we do so, 
journalism and democracy will not just survive. They will flourish.
"""

There you have it. The newspapers are suggesting that Michel be given US$30 
billion a year to hand out to p2p news production services. :-)

Michel, I hereby nominate "Indymedia" to receive a billion dollars a year, 
at least. :-)
   http://www.indymedia.org/

And maybe someone should say something to the police to stop seizing their 
servers?
   "Police Seize UK Indymedia Server (Again)"
   http://www.indymedia.org/pt/2009/02/920323.shtml
"""
Dr. Lee Salter, a senior lecturer in journalism at the University of the 
West of England, told Indymedia "Journalistic material is protected by law, 
and the police should not gather more information than is relevant for their 
investigation - by seizing this server they are not only getting information 
on Indymedia but also on wholly unrelated groups. The police should know 
that Indymedia does not hold personal information on its participants, so it 
is a concern is that the police are collecting random information on 
participants".
"""

--Paul Fernhout
http://www.pdfernhout.net/