Can we truly have a fully independent media?

[steffychun]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/28/blair-murdoch-instruments-political-power

Blair says it all

 

[Cruxx]

No, Ruprt Murdoch has shown the opposite in the UK and US

We're talking about first world countries, aren't we?

 

[deepblue0911]

Can never expect any one entity to be completely independent/neutral/impartial/etc. But if there are many such entities, then people have access to different info, analysis, views/perspectives, thus can make better judgement and decisions.

But our mainstream media are state-owned. The internet allows alternative views and info, but it reaches out to a very different and smaller demographic. Will we see an explosiong of newspapers, magazines and even TV/radio stations that offer non-govt views? I just can't see that happening in the next 5 years.

 

[chonburifc]

The fucking 154 likes to selectively published the worst looking pic of the oppo BUT choose the better looking ones for the pappies ministar and mps even when the pappies ministar and mps and fugly beyond description.

Why so bias har?

 

[deepblue0911]

Why so bias har?

Because they're owned by the govt?

 

[coolguy]

Not only that.
It seems that these workers in our mainstream media are using their position to balantly bully
the oppositions.
it's seems not only are they empowered to do so, they are also very afraid of their masters.
when news of the opposition wins the election is announced, you can see the newscaster faces automatically
turned gloomy and sad, and voices turned solemn.
You can almost sense that an opposition win signals their defeat.

 

[scroobal]

Yes and a Press watchdog body which is independent and handle complaints and abuses.

In order to have a "fully independent" media, you need a sizeable number of media organisations that collectively represent the full range of the political spectrum.

 

[deepblue0911]

Yes and a Press watchdog body which is independent and handle complaints and abuses.

I'm not sure whether there's a model for a press watchdog. But if it's the British one, then the following article says it all:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/wor...-press-watchdog-disbanding-phone-hacking.html

Britain's press watchdog, criticized as toothless, is disbanding

 

[Fook Seng]

Because they're owned by the govt?

No one, including the govt, can own more than a small percentage of SPH. And yet they control it.

 

[deepblue0911]

No one, including the govt, can own more than a small percentage of SPH. And yet they control it.

Chairman ka ki nang can liao lor

 

[wwabbit]

But our mainstream media are state-owned. The internet allows alternative views and info, but it reaches out to a very different and smaller demographic. Will we see an explosiong of newspapers, magazines and even TV/radio stations that offer non-govt views? I just can't see that happening in the next 5 years.

There is a huge barrier to entry to get a populist newspaper / TV station. The only way I can see it happening is some big media mogul comes in to set it up, and that is a huge risk no one is going to take especially if it offends our government....