this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
72 points (76.9% liked)

Memes

45728 readers
1073 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GenEcon@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Thats why most capitalist nations do have a public broadcast additionally to freedom of the press.

[–] NuraShiny@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is it better then nothing? Yes. Is it free, fair and unbiased? Hahaha fuck no.

As someone from a country that has this (Germany): It's not unbiased, because it's financed by the state and dependent upon the parties in power for it's continued existence. In Germany that means being beholden to a bunch of neolib and conservative parties. And obviously these libs and conservatives only know how eat hot chip, lie and privatize everything, meaning state media receives a pittance of money and politicians still complain about that being too much.

[–] LeLachs@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

It is not financed by the state but directly through the citizens (although it is mandatory). Its' job is literally to be unbiased https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/hintergrund-aktuell/311191/oeffentlich-rechtlicher-rundfunk-von-der-gruendung-der-ard-bis-heute/

[–] conorab@lemmy.conorab.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, but said public broadcasters are incentivised to paint the current government in a favourable light in order to keep funding.

[–] Triton@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

That really depends on how exactly the public broadcasting is funded. In Germany for example, this happens independently from other state expenses so there's no way that the government can directly controll the press. For this reason, the press tends to be critical of all political parties, including the ones currently in government.