Replies

Perhaps unawares, Roger zeros in on the basic reason that people of good will have such contempt for the "Newsmedia":

To a representative government such as ours, which is cherished by the American people, an informed electorate is vital.

The people have every reason to expect scrupulous truth from the "Free Press", for this reason alone, though there are others.

When the "Free Press" and its "journalists" deteriorate into a propaganda machine, as ours has, providing the people not truth but propaganda, disinformation, distortions, mendacity, sensationalism, et al., the people cannot depend upon it for information.

If Global Warming should prove to be a fact and the dire predictions of those such as Al Gore come to pass, the blame for the American public's not believing them in advance shall belong to those in the "Free Press" who fed the public propaganda, destroyed the public trust in them, and made it impossible for the American people to rely upon them to speak the truth.

In other words, if Roger wants to serve the public good, he should join the voices demanding scrupulous truth and not propaganda from the newsmedia so that we will know what to believe and what not to believe.

To a representative government such as ours, which is cherished by the American people, an informed electorate is vital.

The people have every reason to expect scrupulous truth from the "Free Press", for this reason alone, though there are others.

IMHO you have fallen for some propaganda yourself.
If you read the First Amendment it says nothing about "fairness," "accuracy," "objectivity," "balance," or "truth." It says that we-the-people have the right to express our opinions. Whether you or I think any, or most, of them are wrong or right - and whether the government thinks they are wrong or right.
That does not mean that you or I have a right to be listened to, only that we have the right to speak. If every Tom, Dick, and Harry has the right to talk or to print, a lot of what they have to say will not be worth listening to or reading - and no one person could listen to, or read, it all. The inescapable conclusion is that the people - you and I, and all the rest - are responsible to ourselves to draw our own conclusions notwithstanding the fact that we will be subject to misinformation and propaganda.
It is the worst possible system, except for all the others. Without the First Amendment, the government would tell us who to listen to. That would be no good, as any journalist would tell you. But they go to the opposite extreme and try to gull us into thinking that they are the ones to tell us who to listen to. Well, it's a free country, they can try to tell me that - but I have my own opinion in that regard, and following their opinion in that regard is not part of my agenda.
If we really followed the First Amendment, broadcasting would be impossible because the censorship which creates clear channels to broadcast in would not be permitted.