"... the oxymoron that is for profit journalism..."
Yesterday I heard a report on the radio about the possible elimination of Public Access TV in San Francisco due to the current budget crisis and state law changing control of cable franchises from local to state control. As a result there is a drastic drop in available funding for the Public Access channel.
One speaker in her support of Public Access talked about Public Access being an antidote to "the oxymoron that is for profit journalism". That gave me pause. I have a great deal of respect for those people who feel so passionately about an under reported topic that they will dedicate their personal time and money to being heard through Public Access. But I had to wonder, does this woman really, honestly, believe that amateurs who have sufficient passion about a topic to at their own time and expense produce a program are going to be less biased than professional journalists with editors, style guides and codes of ethics?
Mind you, I'm not saying for profit journalism is completely unbiased (FOX has destroyed any possibility of anyone thinking that again), but the idea that an impassioned amateur, not backed up by any system of checks and balances would be less biased than the professional struck me as at least humorous, and certainly displaying a lack of self awareness on the part of the speaker.
