Time to End State Intervention in the Media

The RNC Daily

 

COMMENTARY

I thought it would be easy to argue why the state should stay away from regulating or controlling the media. First of all there is an issue of freedom of speech. It is really easy for the government to curb the debate in one direction by paying state ran media to bombard the populous with a pro-government agenda, funding pro-government media under a jobs scheme, using its influence to direct attention away from private business, and actually physically preventing free speech by force.

I would argue that little regulation is almost as bad strong regulation. As long as you hand you rights over the government, you run the risk of abuse. The only way to be secure against government abuse is to never give up any of your liberties. Justice can only remain if every citizen is free sovereign and free. Over the past year Titulia has moved from some involvement in the media, to the blurry line between the BBC and Pravda.

I do not think I am alone in saying that we need unregulated private media, but most recently prominent political and legal elites seem to prefer strict media control. Last year public opinion was against government intervention in media, now it has swung in favour of government regulated media. Has Titulia shifted strongly to the left, or has the governments control over the media finally dominated the majority of media outlets?

As you read this, write down on a piece of paper the amount of private businesses we have in Titulian. Difficult isnt it? But yet successive governments extend government control over the private market to stop growth in the economy. If there is a demand in a service, a private business will form to fill that demand, but not if there is a government monopoly. In order to grow our economy and create more jobs, we need to allow private businesses take over every part of government services that can be ran as a viable business. But as long as the Post remains, the government is diverting attention away from private business. As long as the news stand is there, private media cannot compete with the governments intervention.

Ever hear of American commentators complain about "Socialist Europe"? Even in European Union we have anti-competition laws. Governments are under pressure to free up internal markets and privatise public services. If something is deemed too socialist for Europe, surely it must be too socialist for America.

"the activities of the Member States and the Community shall include, as provided in this Treaty and in accordance with the timetable set out therein, the adoption of an economic policy which is based on the close coordination of Member States' economic policies, on the internal market and on the definition of common objectives, and conducted in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition."

So how can we remedy this?

• We to adopt sensible free speech laws to ensure that government scrutiny is abundant and that private citizens are free public abuse. Intolerance must be curtailed and personal privacy must be protected.

• The Posts influence can be removed by removing the editors and thus ending further publication in the government controlled media.

• The link to the news stand must be removed, and private business should be allowed compete fairly in the media industry. I would have no qualms with Alex Pijanowski continuing his management of the news stand in a private capacity.

OwenMerry,
The Freemarketeers.