Journalism is politics, and anyone who claims otherwise is selling something.Journalism was politics when Jefferson and Hamilton were sponsoring competing newspapers in which to wage their partisan battles and Journalism is politics now. Journalism always will be politics. If you think you see journalism which is not politics, you are actually seeing journalism which expresses your politics.
What the article speaks of as "a legitimate news organization" is Tooth Fairy journalism. It'd be nice if the Tooth Fairy would pay my electric bill, and it'd be nice if "a legitimate news organization" would tell everyone exactly what was important in current events. But what we actually have is concensus journalism - a go-along-and-get-along concensus rather than courageous open partisanship is what passes for wisdom - excuse me, "objectivity."
It is not merely the BBC, and not merely the BBC and NPR and PBS which are illegitimate government-sponsored partisanship. No more than those unworthies could CBS, NBS, or any of the other BS broadcast networks operate without government favor. All require the censorship of the many so that those few might "give us the word" from their Olympian perch.
Broadcast journalism is unnecessary - the Constitution and the British Parliamentary system long predate the advent of broadcasting - and broadcast journalism is illegitimate government-sponsored meddling in politics. In sum, an abuse of government power.
WHO'S HOT & WHO'S NOT! (Iconoclast)
Iconoclast ^ | R. Bastiat
Ping.