Originally Posted by patteeu
Would you also silence giant news organizations (or limit them to $2000 worth of coverage)? Or is it OK if the Rupert Murdochs of the world can dramatically outspend all of those who don't have the luxury of a news network in their portfolio?
Media outlets do present a fascinating wrinkle to this discussion. Because even if we embrace public financing, the superwealthy can (and have) buy up the major media outlets and dominate them that way.
That said, I don't particularly have a great set of answers there yet. I have a few ideas, but they are still in their infancy.
I never believed that public financing was the answer
, anyway. Because public financing would just limit (or outlaw) hard money, while soft money would still be pretty much untouched. I've argued that public financing in an
answer, not the