Would voting for news channels allow better democracy?

**Darkarbiter** · February 21, 2011, 08:10 AM

If people vote for their government, why don't they vote for their media? Surely that is just as important as the government itself? Like say have there be 12 slots for media in a county on free to air tv, and have people vote for say 4 main one's (24/7) and 8 (shares 2-4 channels with others) lesser ones. Have it be selected by preferential voting obviously. This in my opinion would create a much more balanced variety of news, and actually represent popular opinion instead of what views certain individuals would like to sponsor. I also think these channels should be entirely government subsidised (although government's shouldn't censor... except in the case of extreme hate speech) and that personal or business contributions to them should be made illegal, making the only revenue streams be the government subsidy and advertising.

**Jingles** · February 21, 2011, 09:04 AM

uh wut, you mean like the BBC lol?

Seriously though. Good luck breaking the news to Murdoch. That's if he wouldn't have already rallied all the media forces of darkness against such a proposal.

**Ahlerich** · February 21, 2011, 09:21 AM

you are pretty much voting for media. everyone that watches a certain media votes for it more or less

**Armenum** · February 21, 2011, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Ahlerich

you are pretty much voting for media. everyone that watches a certain media votes for it more or less

I agree, your watching it or not is more or less like a vote. Plus, who wants to have media that a majority like? It's good to have diverse perspectives and opinions when it comes to media, not necessarily catering to the majority of people.

**Darkarbiter** · February 21, 2011, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by Lord Mov

I agree, your watching it or not is more or less like a vote. Plus, who wants to have media that a majority like? It's good to have diverse perspectives and opinions when it comes to media, not necessarily catering to the majority of people.

Gee, there aren't many tabloid stations atm

Originally Posted by Timothy Leary

You vote whenever you switch on a news channel. The market is democratic.

Well the point is that there's other things influencing the media (other than what people want to watch and what there's a market for and maybe even what journalists want to make) in a very bad way.

Originally Posted by Timothy Leary

The market is democratic.

This coming from an anarchist is kind've funny

**Enemy of the State** · February 21, 2011, 02:10 PM

Well the point is that there's other things influencing the media (other than what people want to watch and what there's a market for and maybe even what journalists want to make) in a very bad way.

How incredibly vague. What, how and why?

**Darkarbiter** · February 21, 2011, 07:33 PM

Originally Posted by Timothy Leary

How incredibly vague. What, how and why?

Well fox news is obviously pushing a business agenda. Yes the only new you'd get would be popular opinion if you only had one news channel... but that's why I suggested to have several, as most people would probably just watch a few of them but there'd be room for less popular positions. I just believe that the current system has failed at providing us with a range of views (not to say that my view isn't represented in the news just that there isn't much variety), while there is possibly even more variety in the populace than the news.

What about when one big media corporations buys another and then forces the second one to broadcast things more in line with their views? I think that's quite undemocratic hence why I offered the suggestion.

**Enemy of the State** · February 21, 2011, 09:22 AM

You vote whenever you switch on a news channel. The market is democratic.

**Col. Tartleton** · February 21, 2011, 09:26 AM

Cosign Dennis Leary

**Col. Tartleton** · February 21, 2011, 02:45 PM

If media coverage is democratic the only news would be popular opinion which often stupid and generally wrong. If I wanted democratic news I'd listen to gossip or Fox news editorials because most people seem to agree with them. The new shouldn't be democratic, it should be ethical, true (to the best of human ability) and if anything elite.

As tired as I get of "left wing" rhetoric in the news it's miles ahead of the conservative rhetoric until it becomes conservative rhetoric. Like Global Warming. I'm not totally convinced although I am concerned about the environment Al Gore is selling fear and that's disgustingly conservative in the worst way and the real environmentalists criticize him. So as long as the news stays honest and isnt selling lies to people we'll be alright.

**Jingles** · February 21, 2011, 04:18 PM

The news as-is, is just a bunch of stations that you can choose from, without having a say in what they actually broadcast. The mechanism of choice is not in itself democratic. You of all people should know that, tim.

**Pious Agnost** · February 21, 2011, 09:15 PM

Choosing what news channel you want to watch is democratic enough, voting is not the be-all, end-all. Far from it.

Originally Posted by The Ugly

Seriously though. Good luck breaking the news to Murdoch. That's if he wouldn't have already rallied all the media forces of darkness ~~against such a proposal.~~ to hound you into an assisted suicide

**Col. Tartleton** · February 21, 2011, 10:07 PM

If the news was doing it's job there would be two channels: Inter/National and Local. News should be factual updates of what's going on good or ill with a responsibility to not waste people's time with useless bs like non cause effect studies and idiotic debates.

Fox is a problem not because it's immoral conservative bs, but amoral corporate bs. Its entertainment, not news. That's the issue. I'd be happy with hot women reading anything you want off the TelePrompTer in sexy voices and licking their lips seductively. I'm a man, mind control is incredibly easy...