A Journalism Bailout, Ctd.

By Patrick Appel
A reader writes:

I think it's a great idea for whoever is paying someone to do a job to get to say what that person does.   In the original WPA, journalists/writers/etc. were given specific assignments (record the memories of surviving slaves and Civil War soldiers, record music being sung in the TN mountains, compile thorough guides to US cities, and so forth). Any journalist who works for a "boss" (media outlet, interest group, investigatory board or whatever) works on assignment – unless they want to free lance, which they are still free to do. But if the government is going to be paying them for their work, the government - like any other boss - should have the right to give assignments. There are any number of assignments (like making the utterly valuable and irreplaceable recording of slaves' memories) that are historical in nature and of great value to the public (who would, in a sense, be the 'boss')

Another adds:

I don't see a problem with the government deciding what journalists should cover, at least not in the context you're talking about. It's really only a problem when the government decides what journalists shouldn't cover.