Questions Only VI: How Much Is Too Much?

[scottydog]

They're shamelessly making money knowing that headlines with Trump's name get more clicks than headlines with Obama's name. Whatever happened to journalistic integrity? Aren't there schools of journalism, and don't they teach ethics any more?

[RJDiogenes]

Journalistic integrity has gone the same way as any other kind of integrity-- gone with the millennium. CNN and FOX are just ideological mouthpieces now, although the three networks are still pretty much real news outlets, since they get their financing through the networks. The thing is, news sources used to compete by bringing the most people the most reliable news-- now they compete by telling a specific demographic what they want to hear. Since they're all in business to make money, it's hard to find an antidote to that.

Do you think it would be possible to fund a non-profit news organization on the scale of CNN or FOX?

[scottydog]

How could we be assured that the nonprofit was ideologically neutral? Don't nonprofits rely on private giving?

[RJDiogenes]

Depends on the non-profit. The Blue Cross where I worked was a non-profit and didn't accept donations. They make money from premiums and investments. Both Wikipedia and Snopes subsist on individual donations and remain independent. And there would be no problem with the news carrier accepting advertising, as long as they weren't dependent upon it and they didn't have to answer to corporate owners.

Do you think people would flock to an independent news carrier, or even know it when they saw it?

[scottydog]

Most people don't know anything when they see it

Do you think Snopes and other fact-checking organizations are unbiased? Can they be?

[RJDiogenes]

I think Snopes is as unbiased as it's possible to be, as is Wiki. I'm not as sure about other fact-checking sites, depending on their pedigree, but I usually check multiple sources when I need to.

What can be done to make the majority of people check Snopes and Wiki on a regular basis?

[scottydog]

What can be done to make the majority of people check Snopes and Wiki on a regular basis?

I believe that we have to start teaching kids at a young age how to think critically and independently. For some reason, we don't do this, or we do it badly. It seems that we do the opposite, namely, we teach people to think tribally and ideologically. No wonder we have political and culture wars.

So, to answer your question, many (or most?) people don't want accurate and effective fact-checking. They only want their own viewpoints supported.

Where do we go from here?

[RJDiogenes]

I think schools do and have been trying to teach kids how to deal with social media and online trolls, so it's probably more the parents that are the problem at this point. My high-school friend that I got together with the other day has a high-school age kid who he says is very Internet savvy and takes everything with a big grain of salt. But then you've got kids whose parents go to school board meetings and punch people who wear masks, so it may take a couple of generations for that to settle.

I think what we need is a major news channel, funded well enough to compete with CNN and FOX, but run like a real news reporting operation-- no op eds, just fact-based reporting. Hopefully the audience would support something like that.

Would our Space Billionaires be willing to blindly fund something like that, do you think?

[scottydog]

I think what we need is a major news channel, funded well enough to compete with CNN and FOX, but run like a real news reporting operation-- no op eds, just fact-based reporting. Hopefully the audience would support something like that.

I would contribute money to a Walter Cronkite-like newscast whose goal was to inform, not to outrage.

Would our Space Billionaires be willing to blindly fund something like that, do you think?

I'm not sure. It sounds like you're describing a PBS newscast, but average people stay away from PBS. How will this no-outrage newscast attract viewers?

[RJDiogenes]

With an advertising budget supplied by our billionaire supporters, and then hopefully word of mouth.

Snopes actually publishes news articles in addition to fact-checking specific claims. Do you think they should start their own news site and channel?

[scottydog]

Snopes does have a lot of cred, although conservatives (falsely) believe it to be biased.

Bezos' net worth is 200 billion. He could easily provide seed money for this idea and still have well over 199 billion remaining. Do you think he has the social consciousness or the wisdom to believe that we need a nonpartisan Snopes-like newscast?

[RJDiogenes]

He and the other Space Billionaires, as well as people like Bill Gates, claim to be socially conscious and have done a lot for charity, so it doesn't seem like much of a stretch for them to create some kind of a trust fund or independent entity to fund an independent news service (which, coincidentally, was the name of the service that Kolchak worked for ).

What was your opinion of the suggestions in the Supreme Court video that you posted on Facebook? Do you think there should be quotas based on party affiliation?

[scottydog]

Not sure. I'm no legal scholar or constitutional scholar. But it does seem fair to impose term limits of some type, or to explore some type of rotational system. We need fresh blood in the Supreme Court, and by "fresh" I mean tenure-time under 20 years I would think.

What do you think of Robert Reich in general and SCOTUS term limits specifically?

[RJDiogenes]

He makes interesting points, but I don't think he'd be advocating restructuring the court if it were leaning to the Left rather than the Right. As for term limits, I think the court benefits from experience and wisdom, since they are passing judgment on new laws under the umbrella of our oldest laws. The President is limited by terms, the Congress is limited by elections, and the court should be free to go about its business without worrying about that.

But I was specifically dismayed by his idea of using quotas based on political party affiliation. What did you think of that?

[scottydog]

Didn't like that. I agree it sounds dangerous, petty, and politically motivated.

But I do like a 20-year term limit for SCOTUS. As a professor who has watched his expiration date come and go, I realize that new blood in any organization is very important. Not all people become living anachronisms in their profession, but I believe that most do.

If Biden decides not to run in 2024, what Democratic candidate would you want to see run, and which Dem candidate has the best chance of winning?