A media-only campaign has its advantages, but it also has its very severe disadvantages.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think it is absolutely essential in a democracy to have competition in the media, a lot of competition, and we seem to be moving away from that.
I'm worried about the traditional media, but I think the new media is a plus for democracy.
A functional media is as important to democratic freedom as voting.
Some campaigns are not worth waging if you can't win; others have to be fought on grounds of principle regardless of the chances for success.
As the mainstream media has become increasingly dependent on advertising revenues for support, it has become an anti-democratic force in society.
While mainstream media is led by profit, ratings and popularist culture and filtered by the current political climate, Alternative Media is lead solely by the convictions of the campaign and film maker.
The media can be a really strong vehicle.
I don't think it's in any way harmful, this marriage of media and politicians. I think it enhances the communications process considerably and makes it possible for the public to be far more aware, far more up-to-date on issues and the opposite sides of the issues.
Every great political campaign rewrites the rules; devising a new way to win is what gives campaigns a comparative advantage against their foes.
Diversity in media is something that is intrinsic to a democratic society. We do not want the whole media owned by one person.
No opposing quotes found.