Originally posted by: keird
Originally posted by: manowar821
Listen to NPR.
Bump for NPR.
I'm in the military and I still prefer this journalism over the mainstream media controversial sensationalist crap. Journalism isn't supposed to make controversy where there needn't be, that's a business model.
Isn't it interesting how NPR is an example contradicting capitalist ideological predictions.
The fact it's the government at all would have you expecting a nasal bureacrat reading temperatures across the US, for a lot of money. The ideology would say that the market is far more responsive to the needs of listeners, and if the people want quality journalism, they'll get it.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the prediction, NPR in the view of many surpasses any market-driven products - and doesn't cost a fortune to do so.
The fact this is the case doens't mean we want the government opening an auto factory and competing with GM and Ford. But it should show the ideologues they're not quite right.
Put aside the ideology, the bottom line is that 'NPR works'. It creates a quality product, unique in the market, and satisfies a need affordably. Other than for the crazies who will scream that the government is taking their money at gunpoint to pay for this by theft, the situation is just fine. If anything, the BBC shows how even more could be beneficial. But I guess that's not as useful politically as having something to scream about.
Blind ideology on these things isn't helpful. Why isn't it good to have the public pay for its own media content for one outlet among the many commercial stations?
One thing I will say, I see more right-wingers get more fair airtime on the public outlets than on any commercial channel (as I don't watch Fox).