A source told Page Six, “Melania is most concerned about maintaining and increasing a substantial trust for their son, Barron,” but that she isn’t going anywhere.
A free press is necessary for a healthy democracy. I imagine that’s why it was included in the First Amendment. People require information in order to make decisions about how government should operate, and who to elect to represent them. That information should, in large part, come from non-government sources. That doesn’t mean that journalists or media outlets are immune from criticism, but throwing out blanket statements denigrating all press is dangerous.
And it is the responsibility of each citizen to be an active participant in the process of being informed - not just being a passive audience, having whatever just poured over them. Of course different media outlets are going to have different motivations and different agendas. That has been and will always be true. It’s our job to weigh what is presented and make a judgment for ourselves to what degree it’s truthful or makes correct conclusions.
Perfect example: One of the people I watch for Trump criminal cases news and opinion is Glenn Kirschner. I am fully aware that he’s a bit “extra,” but I find that he presents facts about events accurately, and the conclusions he makes are generally well-founded. I don’t always agree fully with Kirschner’s editorializing and predictions, and I continue to pay attention to unfolding events to get a sense of his - and others’ - accuracy.
Again, a free press is necessary for a healthy democracy, and a free press is able to act as a check on itself, so long as the People actively check it, too. What we are doing here with these posts and these comments - we are part of this free press. When we disagree (civilly, I hope), we and others end up better informed.
You’re part of the issue here, and I gotta ask, why?
Jesus, thats quite the interpretation and sort of proving his point.
Criticizing for profit media is seen by liberal voters as an attack on liberal democracy.
You’re part of the issue here, and I gotta ask, why?
A free press is necessary for a healthy democracy. I imagine that’s why it was included in the First Amendment. People require information in order to make decisions about how government should operate, and who to elect to represent them. That information should, in large part, come from non-government sources. That doesn’t mean that journalists or media outlets are immune from criticism, but throwing out blanket statements denigrating all press is dangerous.
And it is the responsibility of each citizen to be an active participant in the process of being informed - not just being a passive audience, having whatever just poured over them. Of course different media outlets are going to have different motivations and different agendas. That has been and will always be true. It’s our job to weigh what is presented and make a judgment for ourselves to what degree it’s truthful or makes correct conclusions.
Perfect example: One of the people I watch for Trump criminal cases news and opinion is Glenn Kirschner. I am fully aware that he’s a bit “extra,” but I find that he presents facts about events accurately, and the conclusions he makes are generally well-founded. I don’t always agree fully with Kirschner’s editorializing and predictions, and I continue to pay attention to unfolding events to get a sense of his - and others’ - accuracy.
Again, a free press is necessary for a healthy democracy, and a free press is able to act as a check on itself, so long as the People actively check it, too. What we are doing here with these posts and these comments - we are part of this free press. When we disagree (civilly, I hope), we and others end up better informed.
What issue?