Reply #82: Not sure if this is right

[scottxyz]

Yes, paper is expensive. But so is spectrum. I don't know the actual numbers.

Also - I think Arendt was saying that there WOULDN'T BE advertisers - money would be raised via the Internet, much as Dean or MoveOn have done.

As for "controlling the content" - I think Arendt has also addressed this to some degree - implying there might be some sort of vote taken on-line to figure out what stories to cover.

I would go further and say that as a safeguard, we should NOT have a rule saying that whoever gives more money, gets to have more say over what gets covered.

The journalists themselves could decide - or some sort of editorial board could decide - or the readers themselves could decide what to cover. NOT the advertisers.

Would there be any advertisers on this thing? I though Arendt said there wouldn't. Wasn't "Ms." magazine done like this - ad-free? Anyone have any info on how that worked?

And let's not do it the PBS/NPR way. Their corporate underwriters aren't advertisers - but they sure do seem to be exercising a lot of editorial control nowadays.

Many newspapers used to have some sort of wall between the editorial and the advertising depts. I remember a few years ago the LA Times experimented with breaking this wall down - in order to please their advertisers more. Maybe that was the beginning of the end.

Anyways, it shouldn't be too hard to set up rules guaranteeing some sort of editorial automony and journalistic integrity.