Reference no: EM133405592
Case Study: Germany was once a deeply divided country, but according to researchers Levi Boxell, Matthew Gentzkow, and Jesse Shapiro, some of the greatest declines in polarization has been seen in Germany. Through this research, economists noticed that countries with declining polarization tend to spend more money on public broadcasting per capita than their other democratic counterparts with more polarization. As stated in the article, "What Germany Can Teach America About Polarization," Germany invests $157 per capita in total funding for public broadcasting, including advertising and sponsorships, whereas the United States spends about $9 per capita in government funding. Included in this allocation of funds is money for a national news station which attracts nearly 10 million viewers daily and ranks as the fifth most watched TV program in 2020. While allocating these funds have centered the news source and helped to hinder the stray and false information that often leads to polarization, I do not think that it is ever possible to completely limit partisan polarization in the United States. It is extremely difficult to be nonpartisan, with a vast majority of the population leaning to one side of the political spectrum over the other, and with the majority of our political news coming from extreme political polarization already, it would be incredibly difficult to flip that around. Providing a central news source that aims to be bipartisan or nonpartisan could help to slow the polarization found in the United States, but given the current environment of journalism, it would interject itself and possibly interfere with the freedom of the press as described in the First Amendment.
Student B:
I completely agree with your statement that " allocating these funds have centered the news source and helped hinder the stray and false information that often leads to polarization" Germany found a great system to help control the influence of political parties in the news. Giving the news stations the funds needed helps prevent that from happening. However, I do believe that it could be possible to have news in the U.S. that is not so polarizing. As humans we will always choose sides but does not mean we have to be as polarized as we are now. Having the government give the right amount of funds to the news broadcasting stations would allow the news to be straight forward and not misinformed. Giving the broadcasting stations the funds they need would not give them the need to receive money from private organizations with political influence. This would allow them to broadcast news that is straight forward and not lean towards the party that is helping them financially. I also believe having a divers group of people broadcasting and working on the news would allow the news to be more unified. Allowing the different views of different political parties and/or people would allow the news to be less polarized.
Question: What are your takeaways from the conversations you've seen about this topic? Do these students make a good point?