Forum about Debates - Society - Optional filter -

Text search :

17940 - from Asta (Denmark) - 2018-01-08 Society : "journalism and state" Hi I want to know about how journalismen and news is in your countries? I am really interested in hearing your opinion, after every thing about fake news. But also because of the shift towards an increasingly digital news outlet. In Denmark we pay what is called "licent" through taxes. the money go to our national public service and entertainment station called "DR" (Denmarks radio). Even though some Danish politicians are trying to remove it or change it, I really like it. Because research shows that countries with strong public service have better news variety. Also non biased and excessable news is one of the fundamental pillars of democracy. Without journalismen a citizen cannot make an educated decision about issues in our society. therefor I think that free and non biased journalism should be a part of the tripartion of power and be treated like the judicial system. by that I mean that it should be provided by the state, because of democratic importance, but should function independently. What do you think? should news be founded by the state? and how are things done where you live?

17940 -

18098 - Reply from Raphaël , 13 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-03-09 C'était bas ça par contre.

17940 -

18089 - Reply from lillian , 13 y.o. (usa) - 2018-02-22 Like you sometimes Raphael?

17940 -

18064 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-20 Indeed, there will unfortunately always be people publicly saying random things without being informed about the issue they talk about.

17940 -

18049 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-12 Hi Korla! Yes, I agree completely; one must always analyze their sources of information.

17940 -

18047 - Reply from Korla , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-12 Freedom of expression through speech or the press, should never be jeopardized. I was meaning to imply that one must watch for what they listen to, hear or read because it may not be a very reliable source of information. Thank You.

17940 -

18042 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-11 Hello korla! Thank you so much for posting! I agree with your analysis of internet and TV news sources. But I wouldn't move in the direction of censoring those who post uneducated opinions. Freedom of speech is very important. I don't think that is what you were suggesting, though. Good points, Korla! But don't forget to check out the third thread from to to bottom where a similar debate is ongoing. Thanks again for joining the debate!

17940 -

18040 - Reply from Korla , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-10 In my own opinions, the shift towards digital news can be rewarding in few ways such as it's convenience and wide variety of topics easy to access on any handheld or stationary device. Even though technology is not going to stop progressing, digital news still has it's many drawbacks. Firstly, headlines and front page photographs can be easily misunderstood and spread through the World Wide web like wild fire. People are not taking the time to read or process information like they used to. Next, people from all over the world can write and post articles on social media accounts on anything, even on topics and issues they don't know the slightest things about. People giving news about what they think they know, is different from a professional who has experience on sifting out the truth and writing it down exceptionally well. Online news sources and personal opinion articles on social media has become almost a blurred line. Though someone might not be riding under the name of a journal or big paper company because more people in today's time has become very passive about things, it is as if the big papers has boiled down to nothing but rumors and gossip and personal columns have taken the place of the big papers, leaving people to believe anything that comes into their eyes or ears. Lastly online news seems to be less and less human touch and more filtered and biased. Not all new resources are deceitful but the good ones are becoming harder to find.    I think that it is okay for some news to be funded by the government, but not all of it. As Abram has so rightly  pointed out "Whenever the government socializes businesses, those businesses soon fail," and I happen to agree with that. It is self evident. There is a limit to how much the government can control and once that line is crossed it can be hard to get back to what it once was.    Occasionally I like to listen to TPR, Texas Public Radio, and often I find some program segments to be biased or untrue. That is why I am glad that America has a free market economy.  When that happens I can turn to another a number of other radio stations that are either independent or funded by the government and hear their point of view on an issue. That is what I like about America. I have the freedom of choice. I can choose for myself what I listen to and agree with whomever I please.  In your country, can you choose to do that? Even if you despise independent news sources, do you have the choice to decide what you feed your mind? Or have you become so narrow-minded that you are not aware that you can agree to disagree? Arguments are very limp with no supporting evidence do not win. If you refuse to agree. May you just open up and say that  you agree to disagree or is that such a burden was well? Much thanks to those that read this through, whether you agree or disagree, remember to always speak up. Peace, Korla

17940 -

18037 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-10 Hello Raphael! I'm sure you're a fine person! Just perhaps a little aggravated; politics can do that to us sometimes. Don't sweat it! I hope at least somebody watching realizes that I am NOT defending America. It is nearly as flawed as Canada. I hope somebody else will comment on this thread as Raphael seems to be out of arguments. But to Raphael: thanks so much for your timely reply and devotion to at least what you think is a good cause! It's been very entertaining to debate with you. Thanks again!

17940 -

18036 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-09 No, you're right, I'm an evil and tyrannical leftie from Canadistan, I came to invade the glorious and perfect USA, so I'll be able to impose my horrible values of justice and social equality. And you're a hero, a god defending liberty against dangerous and dark left-wingers. God bless America! 🇺🇸

17940 -

18033 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-08 Hello Raphael! Like I said, this debate is not America vs. Canada; we're only trying to tease out the relative merits and disadvantages of governmental system, whether they apply to North Korea, Iraq, or Saudi Arabia. I think Canada is a wonderful country overall, if that makes a difference. My comment "You have done well in regurgitating the garbled propaganda of all governments," is not actually a blind accusation; What you are saying is actually what many governments say all of the time. I would still like to know what my other blind accusations were so that I might explain, or atone, for them. I want to reiterate what I said on the other thread; you will automatically concede the debate if you can no longer answer my arguments with arguments of your own. Thank You!

17940 -

18031 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-08 You see, THAT one was actually a blind accusation. And yes, I'm an evil Frenchy kitten-eater, a hypocrite from Soviet Canuckistan!

17940 -

18028 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-07 Hello Raphael! You have done well in regurgitating the garbled propaganda of all governments. You need to understand something fundamental about human nature; "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." This may seem like a baseless assertion, but it is a view that is completely supported by the entire history of governments all around the world. If we could higher angels to run a government, then it would function perfectly. But with humans...no. What is this nebulous uneducated term you say, "deep capitalism?" Do you understand what capitalism actually is? A capitalist is merely one who uses capital, i.e. animals, machines, etc., to increase their production. Even the most extreme communists are capitalists! This is another example of how governments will not clearly define their terms so they can mess up thinking. Justice is served by the judicial system, not by destructive active regulations. If someone has a grievance, all they need to do is take the case to court. I want to make it known that Raphael is officially a hypocrite, unless he can answer my request that he enumerate all of the "blind accusations" that I have supposedly made. Thank You for watching the debate!

17940 -

18027 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-07 Government works for the many. Its aim isn't to make money or grab power, it's to make our society just and equal by providing FREE healthcare and by regulating free market to make sure our economy doesn't fall into deep capitalism.

17940 -

18024 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-06 Hello Raphael! Again, please enumerate to me all of the "blind accusations" that I have made. Otherwise, your statement that I made blind accusations will be a blind accusation itself and you will be a hypocrite. Canadians do buy health care from the government; they pay the government in the form of taxes and the government gives them health care. And they are forced to buy it; that what "universal" means. Sarcasm follows: the government cares so much for it citizens in Canada that it can't allow anyone to not have health care. The government doesn't care; it just wants more money and power over people. Do you agree? If not, PLEASE provide a rational argument to support your belief. Thank you!

17940 -

18023 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-06 We aren't forced to “buy” healthcare from the government. Some people go to private clinics, but a huge majority prefers our excellent public healthcare.

17940 -

18021 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-06 Hello Raphael! Please enumerate to me all of the "blind accusations" that I have made. I can't fully respond to your comment until I know what you think "social democracy" is. But I will say that forcing everyone to buy health care from the government is completely anti-freedom and pro-totalitarianism. Thank you!

17940 -

18018 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-05 Please stop throwing blind accusations. Social democracy is the only way a society can be free and equal at the same time.

17940 -

18014 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-04 Hello Raphael! "Free market is a waste of a time and it doesn't work for the people. It just makes the rich richer and the poor poorer." Is that just what you have been told, or do you have any reason for making that assertion? How can "everyone work for everyone?" When someone works for another person, it means that they have entered into a mutually agreed upon contract. Everybody can't sign a contract that they are working for everyone else. It's just a silly notion, as far as I can see. Maybe I'm wrong, though. If so, please explain. If the government owns a business, it will control that business; the employees of the government will have no clout. Whenever the government socializes businesses, those businesses soon fail; the government doesn't have a strong incentive to run the business properly. Look at history; every time the socialism experiment has been tried, it has resulted in failure and mass murder. Socialism is always a pretext for the government to seize absolute power. In sum, your reply is at best impractical and unfeasible, and at worst an invitation for tyranny and despotism. If you disagree, please take the time to explain your ideas in a clear, coherent way. Thank you!

17940 -

18013 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-04 Free market is a waste of a time and it doesn't work for the people. It just makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. We should consider entering in a planificated popular economy, where everyone works for everyone, and where government owns most businesses, and those businesses would be controlled by their employees.

17940 -

18011 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-03 Hello Raphael! There are at least two problems with a public hospital: Number one, patients have to wait indeterminate periods of time before receiving care. You have corroborated this fact. And number two, a public hospital can only perform procedures that have been approved by the government. Here, US and Canadian hospitals aren't so different because America has many regulating agencies. But for example, if you read the City Journal article, a treatment that was approved in the US was not approved in Canada, a potentially life saving treatment. It was called Erbitux. America is a slightly freer society, so there are more options available to the consumer in America than in Canada. Now let's talk about the free market. A free market is an economy in which the prices of goods is determined by supply, demand, and competition between privately owned businesses. Contrary to popular belief, the American economy is NOT a free market; prices are highly regulated by the FDA, federal reserve, etc. etc. These government agencies have driven prices up and continue to do so. They don't do anything useful, either. They only exist to destroy freedom and make money for the government. You might argue that without the FDA poor, helpless citizens wouldn't know if a product were good or not. That is incorrect. Companies would analyze their own products to ensure that they were safe. If they failed to do so and injured a consumer, then the consumer could easily sue the company and end up either bankrupting it or owning it. A problem arises when we add a new fangled thing called a corporation to the mix. The corporation is a legal individual. Whatever the corporation does is the responsibility of the fictitious entity called a corporation, not the responsibility of the owners of the corporation. If Monsanto poisons your water and you get sick, you will sue Monsanto. Then, if Monsanto can't bribe enough judges and thinks its in trouble, then the owners will just take all of the money and assets out of Monsanto before Monsanto gets dissolved. But Monsanto never really existed. The real people responsible for poisoning you have escaped without consequences. They can just start a new corporation and continue poisoning people until they're found out. Rinse and repeat. But corporations aren't part of the free market; they were invented by the government. The solution to all of the above problems is just to abolish the corporation. So, you see all of the problems that you say are endemic in the free market, are really just products of evil government intervention in the free market. The lesson is hate government intervention, not the free market. Thank you for taking the time to read this and thank you for debating with me!

17940 -

18009 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-03 I completely disagree with you. My family couldn't afford regular private healthcare. If we wouldn't have a free and universal healthcare system, I'd be deaf and one of my knees would be totally finished. Our public hospitals are EXCELLENT. And that “propaganda” is part of who I am. It's our greatest pride as Canadians, and if foreign people attack this fundamental right, it's our duty as patriots to defend our country's basic values. And for what's about free market, I should say that I have nothing but disrespect towards free market. I strongly believe in social, common market, an economy who's built by the society, not by another monster from Wall Street. Power deserves this power, now more than ever before. Stop thinking about profit made by big right-wing business!

17940 -

18006 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-01 Hello Raphael! Did you read the City Journal article? The Canadian Government hates the free market so much that it denies citizens potentially life saving care just because they can't make money off of the free market! With all due respect, please open your mind and try to think outside of the propaganda that you have been fed since day one. Please answer me this time when I ask you this question: do you agree or disagree with what I said in my last comment on this thread, and why? Please let us have a constructive discussion and address ALL of the points in my argument. Thanks!

17940 -

18004 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-02-01 If a patient is about to die, he/she will receive immediate healthcare, obviously.

17940 -

18003 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-02-01 Hello, Raphael! What happens when patients require care immediately or they will die!? Do they just die? How can that system possibly be the "Best" if it puts patients off for so long and has much higher hidden costs than the obvious costs of a free system? Please tell if this does not make sense to you; I want you to understand so that we can discover the truth together. Thank you!

17940 -

17999 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-01-31 The problem in our healthcare isn't about quality, it's about the time we have to wait at the hospital before being seen by a doctor, sometimes up to six hours. But we ruled out since half a century replacing our healthcare system. Universal healthcare system is the best, and here in Canada this is a consensus.

17940 -

17992 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-01-30 Hello Raphael! Have you ever been to the doctor in Canada? If so, what service did you seek? I am not surprised that you could not find an article on cbc that criticized the government. But I don't rule out the possibility that they are sometimes. It's really sad that you have been taught that freedom isn't possible. You are right that rich businessmen and the government are always trying to enslave us. And actually government can help us throw off the adversaries of freedom and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. The founders of the United States in 1776 drew up a document called the United States constitution that would do just that. But the citizenry has become lazy, immoral, and inattentive; allowing the limited government to grab power and ruin the American Dream. Constant vigilance is the price of freedom and we can buy freedom if we are willing to pay that price. It will be worth it. Many people are taught to believe that the Constitution doesn't apply today, or at least the parts that are inconvenient for the government, but Americans can still use that document to throw off the ruling tyrants. Violence may not even be necessary at this point, as it was at the time of the Revolutionary War. Good luck to Canadians; I hope they can find away as well.

17940 -

17989 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-01-30 We have wonderful public services in Canada, services of very good quality. Don't you know that your liberty or freedom is either “stolen” by the government or by a handful of super-rich businessmen. That's your choice. Here we chose the government. I didn't find any article saying that CBC-Radio Canada can be tough with the government, but you could just listen at a newscast from CBC and you'll see it.

17940 -

17986 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-01-29 Greetings Raphael! I have examined the information on cbc. The articles seem to be as you say. Please show an article that affirms your claim "CBC-Radio Canada is often very hard with the government when it has to be." I will believe it when I see it, as they say. The US government is already bloated and unwieldy as it is, wasting billions of tax dollars every year on either senseless or destructive programs. Canada can keep paying its high taxes and continue to receive low quality services. But the US government is trying to grab more power and our freedom has become less "overwhelming" lately. I assure you as a US citizen that this trend has not been helpful in the least. If you would like to become a truly educated person, please ask me to recommend books for you to read. Thank you for being skeptical though!

17940 -

17966 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-01-26 Wrong! It's obvious that you don't know much about that state company. CBC-Radio Canada is often very hard with the government when it has to be so. They're always neutral, more neutral than any American media (whose are always biased). Also, people pay heavy taxes in Canada but we're proud of that since it helps our society being more equal. We almost all love CBC-Radio Canada, and yes, they faced funding cuts by some conservative governments, but they were able to pass through and they indirectly played a significant role in kicking away the right-wing government in 2015. Americans who are accustomed with an overwhelmingly free economy, weak public services and a small government shouldn't make statements about public spending and services to the people. A strong nation is one who can provide efficient public services to its population. USA is a weak and coward nation.

17940 -

17954 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-01-25 Hej, Asta! Thank you so much for your reply! The definition of independent is not depending on anything else. Independent companies support themselves. If that Canadian media company you mentioned is funded by taxation not by its own revenue, then it cannot be independent. There are several potential problems with news media organizations that are dependent on the government. Number one, their funding can be cut at any time by the government. They have to create stories that don't make the government or its agenda look bad, because if they do, then their funding will be removed. This kind of organization intrinsically favors the government which it depends on. "Public money" is just a euphemism for tax revenue. So, the people have to pay for this giant news media organization, which will substantially raise their taxes. CBC Radio Canada may have some good programs, but you'll never hear it speak out against anything bad that the government may be doing.

17940 -

17953 - Reply from Raphaël , 14 y.o. (Canada) - 2018-01-25 Just take a look to CBC-Radio Canada. It's publicly funded, their series/shows are AWESOME and they're fully independent.

17940 -

17943 - Reply from Abram , 15 y.o. (USA) - 2018-01-19 Hej Asta! How can a news media funded by the state be independent?

---

Forum about Debates - Society - (c) Etudiants du Monde / Students of the World
if any remark / question, please contact the webmaster:

https://StudentsOfTheWorld.info