[rrose]

i understand the worry about the government gatekeeping disinformation/misinformation, but I think the worry is massively overblown. We're not talking about the government having a monopoly on the information ecosystem, and while there are certainly controversial topics where the government might be tempted to but their thumb on the scale if they had control over the news, the truth in most cases (climate change, the result of the presidential election, etc) is pretty cut-and-dried.

Besides, the vast majority of the existing misinformation in the US is coming from for-profit news agencies. You're already allowing people to decide what is and isn't misinformation- would you rather it be rupert murdoch, or a politician that you can vote out of office?

[tootie]

There's also no government influence on public media editorial decisions. Congress provides funds to the CPB and the CPB can issue grants to local public media. Even PBS and NPR affiliates all have local editorial control over their broadcasts.

[starkd]

A politician you can theoretically "vote out of office" can be more insidious than big business ever could. Regarding a politician, only collective action can remedy the situation. At least, with business, you get immediate remedy by going elsewhere. And maybe eventual long term remedy if enough people do likewise. Of course, even big business can become too big as to stifle competition.

[rrose]

I just am not sure I agree that a politician is more insidious than big business. A big business has no accountability to anyone but their shareholders. PBS is accountable to representatives elected by citizens. And again, we're not talking about the government having a monopoly on the information ecosystem, so with public news you still have the "immediate remedy"of going elsewhere.

[jameshart]

I don’t think I’ve ever given Dennis Prager any of my business yet that hasn’t stopped him using the money he does have to buy airtime in front of me. That kind of unaccountable media production seems far more insidious to me than anything government funded.

[8note]

Don't you still need collective action for a business? It's even got a name "boycott"

[dredmorbius]

Also "strike", "class action", "legislation", and "regulation".

[gowld]

I can't stop Facebook from poisoning my neighbors' minds by boycotting. In fact, boycotting is worse than joining the platform and engaging.

[starkd]

Whether or not anyone is poisoning anyone's mind is an opinion. It also assumes those minds don't have agency and the ability to discuss issues on their own terms.

[gowld]

Murdoch already decides which politicians are electable in right-wing areas.