Mariel Garza, the editorials editor of the Los Angeles Times, resigned on Wednesday after the newspaper’s owner blocked the editorial board’s plans to endorse Vice President Kamala Harris for president. “I am resigning because I want to make it clear that I am not okay with us being silent,” Garza told me in a phone […]
Both the idea of a newspaper endorsing a political candidate, and someone possessing enough wealth to shape the information most people receive, suck.
This is only a problem when there are three media companies.
The idea of a newspaper endorsing a political candidate is a long standing tradition.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/political-newspaper-endorsements-history-and-outcome/
I think it’s okay to have opinion pieces in media as long as it is labeled as such with “editorial” for example. That’s a part of democracy, not every media needs to be as neutral as Reuters and AFP.
Yeah editorials are fine, but they need to be marked that way. Most media outlets claiming they are “news” nowadays are primarily editorial in nature, and don’t specify that anywhere.
How many hours a day do channels like Fox News actually have news segments versus all the editorial opinion shows? At what point should they no longer be allowed to claim they are a “news” channel or paper?
Under normal circumstances, I might agree. But these are not normal circumstances. Advocate of rights such as free speech will often stand in opposition to fascist authoritarianism. Today should be no different.