Source please! Over here, that's not in the news and we lack a proper source.

Supporting your newspapers isn't bad on its own. The biggest problem in information on the internet is that everyone can supply information without any authority. High quality newspapers are needed, but not necessarily in paper form.
The problem lies deeper though. People, because of the internet, are used to receive information for free. Because of that, news agencies are getting in trouble, and they're needed to have access to verified news. You can say all you want, but a worldwide internet where once source isn't worth more than another, this only opens the doors to virtual economical sabotages and so on.

An extra tax is always unwelcome, but sometimes it's a necessairy thing. If it means protecting verified news, then I'm all for it. but the true sad part here is that the citizens of the US of A apparntly aren't interested in it on its own anymore..

Yeah, I read it Zarf!

I cannot foresee any problems with government funding newspapers. It works great in China. They're big on a free press, and a fine example of the benefits of government getting involved in the media.

"I cannot foresee any problems with government funding newspapers. It works great in China. They're big on a free press, and a fine example of the benefits of government getting involved in the media."

It doesn't have to be that way. The EU funds news agencies, and let's face it, they don't have a good reputation at all.
There's a difference in partially funding it, and controlling it. Every government completely funds ombudsmen, the juridical system and auditbureaus (to check governmental spending). Those institutions are there to keep government in check, while they're completely funded by it. They work well, why would a press bureau that's partially funded with tax money but are otherwise free automaticly mean they're propaganda?

"How does your retort hold in a world where newspaper companies have been able to post their news articles online, posting the same articles which would be otherwise accessed via the newspaper, and being profitable anyway by charging people for the right to access the information and advertising on the website?"

Newspaper websites, at least over here, only give a brief version of the article in the paper form. They also don't charge to access their site. They can't or people would just take the next link in google that is free. It's the same for advertising: the net is a completely different market.
If that doesn't answer your question, I didn't really understand your question..

Oh yes, yes indeed.

But, most Americans don't understand and thus don't like extended government. Soon, "the socialism is evil by default"-tantrum will be uttered again..

It doesn't "automatically" mean anything. And it doesn't have to to be a potential problem. And we know what happens with potential problems in the hands of politicians: they become real problems 100% of the time. You referenced audit bureaus as "working well," but I beg to differ. Waste is rampant across the board in government, often starting with union contracts and extending up the management ladder on every single level.

The point is that it opens the door to exploitation that privately owned media in a free market doesn't have to deal with. So long as people want legitimate news sources in a free market they'll exist. Government propping up competition is only bad for the consumer, even if government never exerts any influence on coverage; which is impossible over time, however directly or indirectly.

This isn't a socialism is evil by default attitude, Commander Christ. Though I do believe that tyranny is evil and you obviously disagree. I simply don't admire the BBC's quality particularly much. Perhaps you've grown used to propaganda and indoctrination in your news media as many on your continent have. I don't desire to move in that direction.

There are no benefits to state funding such media. It's effect is to give an edge to some companies over others, which, in case nobody ever educated you, is bad for the free market and bad for the consumer. It's bad for the consumer. This isn't a theoretical argument about the free market. Of course I don't want my hard-earned money being taxed from me and spent on something that's bad for me and everyone else.

nothing good will come of newspapers lining up for gubmint cheese.   the media covering US politicians already tends to trade silence for access, so the reporters can make big bucks selling books.  "hey did you guys know Mitt romney stole cars on the campaign trail? I was there!"  that kind of thing, that might be nice to know when it happened instead of 8 years later.

If newspapers can not compete then they should die off.

I agree with Bief. I already slapped myself for that.

"This isn't a socialism is evil by default attitude, Commander Christ. Though I do believe that tyranny is evil and you obviously disagree. I simply don't admire the BBC's quality particularly much. Perhaps you've grown used to propaganda and indoctrination in your news media as many on your continent have. I don't desire to move in that direction."

I have never advocated tyranny whatsoever. There's a difference between not linking funding and controlling and supporting a tyranny. And the statement you made that we've all been indoctrinated is only as intelligent as a goose trying to mow the lawn. Another senseless EU vs. US thread is not what this board needs. If you can't accept that we do certain things differently, and that another approach isn't always worse than your approach or evil, than it only shows your narrow view (wich ironicly is always one of the first insults people use against your countrymen).

------

Note: I don't care wether the newspapers should be funded or not. I'm only saying that protecting agencies that supply verified newsfacts and other true information (wich varies to scientific magazines to international news) is a valuable thing and necessairy everywhere.

Government can cause it mixes it with love & makes the world taste good!

/bangs tambourine

Leeeet the sun shiiiine
Leeeet the sun shine in
The suuuuuuuun shine in

Shit that's 40 years old