To the Editor:

In every totalitarian and fascist regime suppression of the free press is the very first order of business. A free press is not just another newspaper; it is vital for Democracy to survive.

How else can a free people make informed and intelligent decisions about the safety and security of their country?

How else will we expose the corruption in those deep dark spaces unless the free press shines a light on it? It is not necessary to close down newspapers in order to kill the free press.

Constantly telling a non-reading, low informed electorate that all the news is fake and that all journalists are lying and are out to get you, then the truth eventually dies.

Trump recently said “What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening” and “Polls are fake, just like everything else”.

This same electorate will then see Trump as the sole authority for truth.

If this is your viewpoint, then you have unknowingly accepted totalitarianism.

Russia, Turkey, Thailand and North Korea are countries that have turned the free press into the mouthpiece of the despot.

Is it coincidence that the leaders of these countries are the very ones that Trump says he admires as “very strong” and all say that the press is “the enemy of the people”?

When Democracy is under attack, the only salvation is that self-governing citizens remain informed ... an informed electorate starts and ends with courageous journalists.

The greatest fear of authoritarianism is the survival of the free press.

Sandra Blankenship

Killeen

(1) comment

Alvin

Constitution starts with the news as printed by our local news paper, by publications that are published so as to be read by the public, and not withheld by people that read and correspond with that so called news medium. If we do not have a free press and are subjugated to a slanted form of 'free expression, such as what I deem the news media of ABC, NBC, and CBS plus all of the other major news press, and they constantly harp on Trump not conforming to your views of what is correct', then this can be a one sided point of view. In order to present both sides of a story you must print both sides, not just one side.
Copy: 'Constantly telling a non-reading, low informed electorate that all the news is fake and that all journalists are lying and are out to get you, then the truth eventually dies.
Trump recently said “What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening” and “Polls are fake, just like everything else”.
This same electorate will then see Trump as the sole authority for truth.
If this is your viewpoint, then you have unknowingly accepted totalitarianism.' End of copy.
You superimpose your beliefs that you have the whole truth and that your beliefs are far superior to everyone else. By your admission, your sentiment, as you eloquently point out by illustrating 'Constantly telling a non-reading, low informed electorate that all the news is fake and that all journalists are lying and are out to get you'. By this statement, you are implying that 'those who do not agree with your point of view then are ignorant of what is the truth so therefor you must tell it to them whether your point of view is indeed correct'.
And as to, 'This same electorate will then see Trump as the sole authority for truth', I must say that many of the older generation, older than the millennium age and mind set, do not agree with your statement and feel that this country is swinging from a Democracy to a Socialist format. When you state that by not conforming to a doctrine such as you are presenting, then you discount all other forms of recognition, yours is the only one that is correct and must be paramount.
This news paper I feel is one such news paper that does not 'allow' for the discussion of current events, such as 'how this city government functions as a 7 member city council with a city manager when it is shown by the voting characteristics by a four member simple majority thus negating the other 3 city council members, then dis-allowing any comments in this news paper to the contrary, thus only allowing the 'positive (?) comments to be presented by this newspaper'.
Others, such as the age group I am referring to demonstrate that 'not only you and your newspaper can be deceived, but that somebody has a view that is differing from yours and it should be accepted. If it is not then 'you have the shoe on the other foot and it is in deference to what the general public wants'. This is called a Democracy and not Socialism.
This has been 'one from an older age group, other than apparently you are'.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.