Being for the Benefit of Journalism

I am sitting here before chapel, enjoying my daily cup(s) of coffee and reading an article about the Berlin Wall in USA Today. I am also thinking about my journalism blog...specifically if the government should give money to papers (Which I know...whoa...heavy stuff for morning coffee).

So here is what I think. One: this outwardly seems like a good idea: Yay! Our tiny paper which could almost go out of business is now getting money and stays alive! We are happy!

HOWEVER...this leads me to think Two: Soon government may say "We give your paper money, and we don't like some things you print. RETRACTION FOOLS!" Paper suddenly has become like fascist state and therefore defeats purpose of journalism, that is, exposing truth to masses, especially exposing governmental secrets. For example...Watergate. Where would we have been without journalists? More terms for Nixon? No thank you.

Now, I realize this is probably a bit of an exaggeration. I mean, realistically, the government probably isn't going to keep tabs on every little newspaper it funds like some creepy Big Brother-esque organization and say things like "Well, the Fargo North Dakota paper is printing some pretty inflammatory things...let's get 'em!" BUT...the government could feasibly introduce a caveat of rules that is mandatory when accepting federal funds for a paper.

We read newspapers for opinions and facts the government won't tell us (even though admittedly there are some skewed papers and journalists...) Although the idea of government funds intitally seems like a good idea, the interference of government goes against the fundamental principles of journalism. The End.

In other news, I'm getting a fish. I am thinking of calling it Tina. Or Bubbles.