Goldberg's Dictatorship
17 June 2023 By Abiodun Kareem Giwa
Whoopi Goldberg (Courtesy: Dominic Bindl/Getty Images)
Whoopi Goldberg reportedly said she did want to hear anyone talking about Hillary or Biden on classified documents. She was emphatic. Goldberg is not alone. She has a section of the media called 'the mainstream' with her. She appears on a platform called 'The View' in one of the major media networks in self-censorship. But information enthusiasts only have a choice to go to all the media platforms for relevant and irrelevant news, unlike people in the garb of padlocking everyone and claiming to work for the media.
It is a dictatorial tendency. The employer is also autocratic. The likelihood of an employer rubbing authoritarian measures on employees is possible. Workers in the mainstream do not hate engaging in all issues. Still, no thanks to the verbal gag in their employment restricting them from covering topics unfavorable to an employer's ideology. Lack of Journalism training leads to thoughts of doing favors covering one side of a story rather than abiding by the profession's ethics' of attention to all sides of a story.
Cato's Letters say without freedom of thought, no wisdom, and public liberty - the right of every citizen as far as it does not hurt and control the right of another. If we agree with John Locke that government censorship is an improper exercise of power, how do we describe self-censorship? Don't people have the right to be dumb and deaf or otherwise? Silence is, at times, golden.
But silence becomes criminal when it is about entire organizations having the power to influence a community's political direction from destruction. And that brings to the fore the political organization, membership from various classes in society, and their share of power. A good example is the United States with the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. There are the rich and poor in both parties.
People with low incomes, the proletariat, are the majority in both parties. But the rich, minority, dominate the working class; according to the authors of Classic Organization Theory in "Democracy and the Iron Law of Oligarchy," the minority rich are in control of both parties so long the poor don't have the means and are powerless. The same applies to the government, where the few elected members are from the upper class - Ditto for the media, where the owners dictate the tune. The Liberal press publishes or airs messages liked by members of their political ideology, and so for the Conservative news outlet.
But whether Conservative or Liberal, any organization in the business of disseminating information cannot wholly abandoned the ideal of holding government accountable to the people. It can only happen where the minority in government and the media have conspired to deprive the people of accountability of their elected representatives. It is the business of the press to make any official accountable or help to ease the fears of the public that such an officer is not a danger to the community's wellbeing through the presentation of information capable of convincing readers.
To utterly disregard genuine information or try to kill it is unwarranted. However, it does not mean the other ideology's media should allow the competing ideology member to survive with infractions without accountability. Journalists on Fox News are doing an excellent job in this context; on a few occasions, the owner wants to mitigate the danger of losing the license for operation. The mainstream can choose to be dumb careless of the danger its attitude constitutes to our good health with a president accused of bribery and chooses not to report it.
Goldberg should no longer appear on "The View" for trying to censor the public in a typical democratic setting and for media freedom but for her employer's approval of her unprofessionalism. How would she shut people up in a debate over classified papers and the indictment of a former president without mentioning or comparing the precedence before it?
She should know Journalism is not a theatric forum where actors actresses say or play roles much against their for money and fame.
It is a dictatorial tendency. The employer is also autocratic. The likelihood of an employer rubbing authoritarian measures on employees is possible. Workers in the mainstream do not hate engaging in all issues. Still, no thanks to the verbal gag in their employment restricting them from covering topics unfavorable to an employer's ideology. Lack of Journalism training leads to thoughts of doing favors covering one side of a story rather than abiding by the profession's ethics' of attention to all sides of a story.
Cato's Letters say without freedom of thought, no wisdom, and public liberty - the right of every citizen as far as it does not hurt and control the right of another. If we agree with John Locke that government censorship is an improper exercise of power, how do we describe self-censorship? Don't people have the right to be dumb and deaf or otherwise? Silence is, at times, golden.
But silence becomes criminal when it is about entire organizations having the power to influence a community's political direction from destruction. And that brings to the fore the political organization, membership from various classes in society, and their share of power. A good example is the United States with the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. There are the rich and poor in both parties.
People with low incomes, the proletariat, are the majority in both parties. But the rich, minority, dominate the working class; according to the authors of Classic Organization Theory in "Democracy and the Iron Law of Oligarchy," the minority rich are in control of both parties so long the poor don't have the means and are powerless. The same applies to the government, where the few elected members are from the upper class - Ditto for the media, where the owners dictate the tune. The Liberal press publishes or airs messages liked by members of their political ideology, and so for the Conservative news outlet.
But whether Conservative or Liberal, any organization in the business of disseminating information cannot wholly abandoned the ideal of holding government accountable to the people. It can only happen where the minority in government and the media have conspired to deprive the people of accountability of their elected representatives. It is the business of the press to make any official accountable or help to ease the fears of the public that such an officer is not a danger to the community's wellbeing through the presentation of information capable of convincing readers.
To utterly disregard genuine information or try to kill it is unwarranted. However, it does not mean the other ideology's media should allow the competing ideology member to survive with infractions without accountability. Journalists on Fox News are doing an excellent job in this context; on a few occasions, the owner wants to mitigate the danger of losing the license for operation. The mainstream can choose to be dumb careless of the danger its attitude constitutes to our good health with a president accused of bribery and chooses not to report it.
Goldberg should no longer appear on "The View" for trying to censor the public in a typical democratic setting and for media freedom but for her employer's approval of her unprofessionalism. How would she shut people up in a debate over classified papers and the indictment of a former president without mentioning or comparing the precedence before it?
She should know Journalism is not a theatric forum where actors actresses say or play roles much against their for money and fame.
Widget is loading comments...
