I am to the point now that "restrictions" on the media are starting to sound good. It would be quite different if the "media" was dedicated to fact-finding and straight reporting. But the "media" referrenced here is the mouthpiece of politcal parties and pressure groups that poses as an organ of "unbiased reporting". This media attacks free speech (by anyone they disagree with) and promotes regulation of speech (as long as it is that of their enemies) so they are, in my estimation, more an agent of harm than good. I could care less if they have problems collecting the slop they pass off as "news".
I have thought that for some time.
We have checks and balances in government. There has never been a check on the media. (In reality, there should not be other than me being p*ssed off at them!)
One could argue the "free market" is the check on the media which explains the popularity of FR, FOX News and talk radio, I guess.