Having a free media doesn’t mean better quality

In Media on 22/10/2012 at 7:19 am

Netizens seem to think that a media not controlled by the govt will offer better and more sophisticated analysis. These comments from young journalists covering the crisis in Europe  indicate that even in a “free” media, the media often does do not explain the social effects of what is happening and, “Often journalists themselves do not know and do not make an effort to understand what is really going on.”

LKY has always defended the PAP’s stance on the media by pointing out that the Rupert Murdoch’s of this world use their media interests for their personal agendas.

  1. It must be a joke for LKY to comment about Rupert’s own agenda? It’s a pot calling the kettle black.

    • Not a joke because unlike the media barons who talk the talk but not walk the walk, he has always been open abt why he wants the media to be subservient to him.

  2. Who says the expectation is that free media will be more sophisticated? The expectation is that free media is not govt-controlled and not allowed to drive a govt agenda.

  3. Ah, classic strawman argument. Having a controlled media doesn’t mean better quality either. So all things being equal, is it better to have free or controlled media? Is it better to have one viewpoint allowed or many viewpoints aired? Is this post serious or meant to be a joke by the author?

    • Stop posting cock here. Go elsewhere. Did I argue the point you said I argued. Did you even read what I wrote? Will be spammned for another stupid comment.

      • Wah, so offended? Must be what I said was correct lah =) Yes you did attempt to link freedom to quality of media. Stop misleading people with your brand of logic. But then again, people are discerning, as can be seen from the comments rebutting your twisted logic.

      • Now you twisting or juz spastic. Juz read what they said, not what you think they said.

  4. I do not think a free mainstream media will necessarily lead to better and more sophisticated analysis. But I still want it.

    When I research my thesis, I read many authors. Many of them are crap. Does that mean I should be forced to read only one?

    I read hundreds of blogs. Many are crap. Does that mean I should be forced to read only one?

  5. With a free MSM, the ultra-liberal immigration policy of the previous decade would not have been possible. A free MSM will also force the government to account for the Reserve!

    • You want the media to be the 4th estate?

      • No. Juz want our local media to be honest that the media is another arm of the PAP’s propoganda machine i.e. that it is not objective in reporting facts and analysis, and in analysing. What annoys me most are the petty stuff, like not pointing out that grain prices are shooting thru the roof when reporting minister’s comments that food prices are stable.

  6. But for every Rupert Murdoch rag there is a counterbalance like the Guardian. Sure there’s no way to avoid bias in any newspaper cos ultimately its people not robots writing the articles,but surely it’s better to have many newspapers with differing biases than one monolithic entity offering only the incumbent’s poiny of view! The quality part will be sorted out by true competition – I’m sure we are intelligent enough to ditch the rubbish rags – once we have real choices.

  7. In the world of free media, who has the money and influence wins. The politicians in the UK and the financiers behind their backs are always courting the editors of fleet street, for ostensibly reasons. The media has always been a love and hate affair for the UK politicians.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: