“Publicly owned” and “State run” are different things.
The CBC is a crown corporation (a not-for-profit company governed by an official charter). The current Canadian government has no say over what they do or do not report on or how they do it. They’re funded by public money, but they decide how that money is spent. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s a far cry from being a literal propaganda vehicle for the government.
Whether it be through private ownership or through capitalist-dominated public media, mass media in capitalist states inevitably exist to propagate the ideas of the capitalist class.
My point is that “state-run” isn’t a bad thing in and of itself, it depends on the class character of the state running the media. If the US were socialist, I’d welcome consistent state-run media. I think a lot of people have negative impressions of state media, and figured I’d go against the grain a bit and provide a socialist perspective.
Independent, fully independent media, is crucial for a country to not slip into authoritarianism. The temptation of starting manipulating people’s minds given the instrument will be impossible to resist.
The media should be fully independent though, including independence from capital.
Independence from what? Independent media in capitalist society is overwhelmingly dominated by private ownership. This limits us to news like Breakthrough News, but BT News is very small in comparison to massive private media. Independence in socialist countries is independence from the socialist system and from the organized working classes. There is no such thing as actual “independence” in media, because media exists within a definite context.
Even in that wonderful socialist society you’re envisioning, organized working class appoints “managers”, and those become the ruling class. In order for them not to, they need to have very little power outside of what’s necessary. Having a state media in this case becomes this power.
So, as I said in my previous comment, a media independent both from the rulling class and from capital is a necessary prerequisite or having a free country.
“Publicly owned” and “State run” are different things.
The CBC is a crown corporation (a not-for-profit company governed by an official charter). The current Canadian government has no say over what they do or do not report on or how they do it. They’re funded by public money, but they decide how that money is spent. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s a far cry from being a literal propaganda vehicle for the government.
They are somewhat different, but the CBC serves the same purpose as RT, BBC, and now Trump News: to reinforce the ideas of the ruling class.
As opposed to ruling class run media?
Whether it be through private ownership or through capitalist-dominated public media, mass media in capitalist states inevitably exist to propagate the ideas of the capitalist class.
So you see how your point isn’t meaningful?
My point is that “state-run” isn’t a bad thing in and of itself, it depends on the class character of the state running the media. If the US were socialist, I’d welcome consistent state-run media. I think a lot of people have negative impressions of state media, and figured I’d go against the grain a bit and provide a socialist perspective.
Independent, fully independent media, is crucial for a country to not slip into authoritarianism. The temptation of starting manipulating people’s minds given the instrument will be impossible to resist.
The media should be fully independent though, including independence from capital.
Independence from what? Independent media in capitalist society is overwhelmingly dominated by private ownership. This limits us to news like Breakthrough News, but BT News is very small in comparison to massive private media. Independence in socialist countries is independence from the socialist system and from the organized working classes. There is no such thing as actual “independence” in media, because media exists within a definite context.
Even in that wonderful socialist society you’re envisioning, organized working class appoints “managers”, and those become the ruling class. In order for them not to, they need to have very little power outside of what’s necessary. Having a state media in this case becomes this power.
So, as I said in my previous comment, a media independent both from the rulling class and from capital is a necessary prerequisite or having a free country.