[splittist]

OK. I have contemplated the list of Pulitzer Prizes for Beat Reporting(http://www.pulitzer.org/bycat/Beat-Reporting) as an example, and fail to see anything that doesn't advance the dominant paradigm. If that is what 'public service' means to you then I wonder why we need a whole estate that arrogates such particular privileges to itself.

[mpyne]

> and fail to see anything that doesn't advance the dominant paradigm

Speaking truth to power is not congruent to tearing down the dominant paradigm.

If you oppose the dominant paradigm, it should be because the dominant paradigm is wrong, not because it's dominant.

[001sky]

giving voice to stories and ultimately serving as an independent check on government and power

What is this "check" then? SCOTUS checks legislation by throwing it out. Nobody has elected or consented to "journalists" having a constitional role. That being said, the constitution protects the people to talk amongst themselves, so that the electorate is itself effective, and can check power via the ballot box.

The issue at hand is the role of money in the "talk amongst yourselves" narrative. And its potential corrupting influence (bascially--buying vote for special interests and PR clients).