Has state run media historically been bad or good?

Now by media I am just under the assumption that you are referring to the the news media. If the media is run by the state then there is a conflict of interest to always show the state, or a certain faction of the state, in the best light possible.

>>2026013
state-run bad, public funded good

Go study the history of the media and public relations in america and then you can come wine about breibart.

>>2026052
>muh fourth estate
>muh freedom of the press
>muh jfk had friends at the nyt

>>2026013
>>2026030
This guy has it right. Its too dangerous to have state run media, but if you have unregulated and unfunded media you get Fox News and MSNBC. They just go for the ratings and frankly its on par or even worse to state run. At least with state run you can kinda shift through the propoganda, with ratings run media you are just inundated with ignorant ramblings and controversial but unimportant bullshit.

Lügenpresse was always shit tier. At all times you had to use your brain and filter information on your own.

>>2026030
public funded media are usually the ones behind extreme movements

>Reign of Terror
>Rise of Fascism
>most Communist revolutions

if you like all of those then I guess it would be all good

>>2026013
I'd say that non-state run media is no guarantee of the quality of the news.

>>2026238
I meant things like NPR, PBS, and the BBC
we're all very impressed by your citing the 3 most generic "gov bad guyz" examples in history

>>2026013
It has been the best in my country historically.

>>2026283
most state-run media are usually just public-ran media who's side "won" anyway