Far-left Salon is dreaming of a 'very different media' where this article probably wouldn't even exist

The folks over at far-left-leaning Salon.com are dreaming of a "very different media," one where Fox News and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh no longer exist. The website on Saturday published excerpts from "Imagine: Living in a Socialist USA" to advocate for the kind of media that would exist if the "people had their voices heard."

Amazon.com

In this socialist dream, the "corporate-controlled" mainstream media would become obsolete and replaced with a media owned by the state and, in most cases, by labor unions. Sounds great, right?

"In a socialist society a portion of the media would be reserved for news disseminated by the democratically elected governing bodies, that is, working people elected by and for working people," the excerpted text reads. "But state ownership is not the only way media can represent the interests of working people, to speak with or through their voices. In most cases, the media would be owned and operated by working-class organizations—labor unions, neighborhood associations, and cultural centers."

With no more corporate sponsors "controlling" the media narrative, "government media will report on and discuss, for example, the major government plans for production, how to improve education, and more."

So what about media bias in a world where the media are run by the government and labor unions?

"Can a newspaper or TV news program run by the autoworkers’ union, for example, provide critical reports about that union’s problems and weaknesses?" the book asks. "Why not? Who better to discuss and debate problems inside a union than the members who live with and often suffer from those problems?"

So far, we have a media controlled by the government, labor unions and other left-leaning special interest groups that are miraculously entirely free of bias. However, the biggest difference between the media today and the media under a socialist system will be "what gets covered," the book argues.

"With no corporate padlocks, the media door will be open for a variety of forms different from the news we’re permitted today," the text adds. "Instead of assigning reporters and editors to cover beats (and often it’s not just beats but entire sections of each day’s news) such as celebrity weddings or Wall Street wheeling and dealing, socialist media will have beats of a different class—working-class beats."

Further, "social justice committees" would be elected in this society, hand-selected by union membership to "look into complaints and to dig up and root out capitalist, racist, and sexist weeds that continue to grow."

"Stories about life under capitalism, about the struggles to create a new and just society, and about forming a socialist democracy will all make for compelling reading. It is up to us to make sure this happens," the excerpted material published by Salon finally concludes.

(Fox News)

Sarcasm aside, it has been demonstrated time and time again throughout history that a government-controlled media is not a free media. The ease with which the government and labor unions would be able to censor the news is a chilling prospect to imagine. We would suddenly find ourselves in a world where free speech in the media would first have to be "approved."

It's no coincidence that Salon's article specifically features Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Megyn Kelly and mentions Limbaugh. What the website seems to be pushing for by publishing the controversial book excerpt is a media that allows no opinions that they may disagree with, which would certainly include TheBlaze too.

A truly free media always has room for more voices, but never less.