Why aren't there protests to defund the mainstream media and newspapers as there's nothing good that comes from the old media and newspapers?

[operationoverdrive]

Why don't we just get rid of the old dying media and newspapers it is already dying and eventually going to be dead anyways but it's already dead like the rest of the tv and newspapers? No one really listens to the old dying media anyways so it's better to just get rid of it as nowadays people get their info online besides the media is long over due in it's lifetime.

[MrOracle]

The news channels are owned by big media conglomerates, and the newspapers are more often owned by wealthy individuals or families. Hurst Media, which owns many newspapers, is owned by the family of William Randolph Hurst. Amazon's Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post.

All that could be done was to boycott advertisers, which, if enough people did it, would cause them to lose money (CNN and MSNBC have terrible ratings, but still get advertisers). But as most owners are pushing a political agenda, many would be willing to fund the losses to retain their outlets for pushing their agenda - and a lot of them have DEEP pockets to fund them even if the lose a lot of money.

[BeMuse]

So stop paying for cable/satellite, use an add blocker if you happen to be auto play one of their youtube videos, and cancel your newspaper and magazine subscriptions. It’s pretty simple… Vote with your dollars. If they are selling shit, then stop consuming it. That’s the sort of protests that works, not marching in the street being an asshole. When they lose tons of advertising money and subscriptions and their level of influence diminishes that’s the only point that they will realize what they are doing is wrong. That is unless China buys them out and keeps shoveling shit to destroy American culture and push propaganda.

[NopeWhatTime]

Everyone else already explained why defunding wouldn't work, and because of the constitutional right to freedom of the press, the government cannot get rid of the media. If you don't like it, then you can personally boycott the media

[chapawapa]

You can't defund mainstream media. It's not even funded. Not funded by the government. It will die when people truly stop watching.

[MzAsh]

Dying? Ad revenue says otherwise.

[MzAsh]

If you’re only referring to paper newspapers, boomers and older still purchase them. Once they die off, they will cease to exist.

[Anonymous]

Because their income comes from consumers, not tax payers. Also most, if not all newspapers, have a subscription based website.

All the exposes of trump's crimes and corruption have come from sources like the associated press, wall street journal, ny times and washington post. including the recent news uncovered by the washington post that trump's post master general, louis dejoy, is likely guilty of election fraud.

And what exposes have the propaganda team at breitbart, timcast and faux news uncovered? Nothing but hate mongering, fear mongering and covering for trump.

[Archerer]

Lmao, come on man, the "media" isn't funded. Just stop watching. I say the same thing about products made from child labour, or meat eating, or destruction of morality. If we don't buy into it, it wouldn't happen. Capitalism mixed with human psychology lets it happen, no one actually cares enough to change how easy things are. Be the change you want to see.

[normalice]

What you're describing is a boycott, not a protest.

[Rangers]

Because we'd be painted as terrorists and framed for fake crimes like CNN tried to do in the Virginia Gun rally where they placed spent shell casings on the ground and tried to say people were shot

[R3DthatDude]

The media is the sheep herder, they will never get rid of it, especially since there is nothing to replace it

[stuntbrain]

The fact that media isn't funded with tax dollars is a major reason

[asshole_]

no, there's nothing good that comes from shit shows like brietbart

[Unit1]

Government hates losing control over us.

[jeremy_09]

they are not funded by the government