Recently, at work, a group of us had an interesting discussion about the Internet, the demise of newspapers and the future of democracy.
Sounds like a lot but the discussion focused on the future of newspapers. If they are to die, and we all agreed they are dying quickly, who will be the watchdogs?
One group argued that newspapers protect us against corruption, evil, etc. The other group (myself included) argued that it didn't matter. The world has changed, we argued, and it's easier for average citizens to broadcast and uncover corruption.
In the end we agreed to disagree. Afterwards I came across a column by Jon Fine of BusinessWeek. (Click here for full column.)
The column is mostly about the Newseum in Washington, D.C. However, Jon makes a good point, relevant to my work discussion:
Its placement on such an august stretch of D.C. real estate implicitly puts the news biz in league with the powers it's supposed to remain skeptical of, though anyone who has suffered through government-journalist group gropes such as the White House Correspondents' Dinner knows how uncomfortably close those teams are in real life.
Good point. Seems that the institutions we hold up to be the watchdogs aren't always as pure as we'd like them to be. It's always struck me that the most prominent journalists we supposedly look up to are also part of the group we're trying to keep an eye on.
