Swiss perspectives in 10 languages

What do you think about direct funding of Swiss media?

Hosted by: Renat Kuenzi

Editorial note: following numerous reader contributions to this topic, we have now closed this debate. More topics are open for comments here. If you wish to contribute feedback on this topic or suggest other ideas for debates, please e-mail us at english@swissinfo.ch.

The coronavirus pandemic has further weakened Switzerland’s already struggling media industry. To help news organisations, the Swiss authorities want to give the press more financial aid.

To the surprise of experts, this idea currently has broad support in Switzerland – more support than anywhere else in Europe.

How do you see the role of the media in a democracy? If you live abroad, does the government of the country you live in offer support, financial or otherwise, to media outlets?

From the article Broad support for direct funding of Swiss media

You can find an overview of ongoing debates with our journalists here . Please join us!

If you want to start a conversation about a topic raised in this article or want to report factual errors, email us at english@swissinfo.ch.

Roadtripper
Roadtripper
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.

State support means no more independence. For a newspaper, for an artist, etc. In short, for everything that has an opinion.
On the other hand a journalist has only the independence that the owner of the newspaper (or TV/radio) gives him. The paradox is that a left-wing newspaper is often owned by a millionaire, an investment fund, etc... so rich people (see L'Humanité) but the state can't help without implicitly taking a position (that's where we get the "in the name of diversity of the press")
Where it gets complicated is when the "extreme" editorial line scares away the big advertisers (example of a certain Geneva newspaper) ... and that the subscriptions are insufficient to cover the costs.
Money is the sinews of war. And what is financed no longer has a (completely) independent opinion and becomes manipulated.

Qui dit soutien étatique dit arrêt de l'indépendance. Pour un journal, pour un artiste, etc. Bref pour tout ce qui a une opinion.
D'un autre côté un journaliste n'a que l'indépendance que lui donne le propriétaire du journal (ou de la TV/radio). Le paradoxe étant qu'un journal de gauche est souvent propriété d'un millionnaires, d'un fond d'investissement, etc ... donc de riches (voir L'Humanité) mais l'état ne peut pas aider sans implicitement prendre position (c'est là qu'on nous sort le "au nom de la diversité de la presse")
Où ça se complique c'est quand la ligne rédactionnelle "extrême" fait fuir les gros annonceurs (exemple d'un certain journal genevois) ... et que les abonnements sont insuffisants pour couvrir les frais.
L'argent est le nerf de la guerre. Et ce qui est financé n'a plus d'opinion (complètement) indépendante et devient manipulé.

Beige-Lac-de-Moiry
Beige-Lac-de-Moiry
The following contribution has been automatically translated from PT.

The state should not fund the media. The state is a social pervert. And the media has been a great manipulator and biased. In fact, when we talk about the media, we refer to the conservative media. Today there is an alternative media. The media should receive support from the readers when they buy it. If they don't buy it, they are disapproving, and it is not up to the state to maintain what the people don't buy, and therefore don't approve.

O Podee de estado nao deve custear a midia. O estado e perversor social. E a midia tem sido gde manipuladora tendenciosa. Alias, qdo se fala midia se refere a midia conservadora. Hpje ha a midia alternativa. A midia deve receber apoio dos leitores qdo a compram. Se nao compram estao desaprovando e nao cabe ao estado manter o q o povo nao compra, portanto nao aprova.

FLéchaud
FLéchaud
The following contribution has been automatically translated from PT.

I don't agree, mainly because it ends with the independence of the media.

Não concordo, principalmente por acaba com a independência dos meios de comunicação.

snowman
snowman

No public money into media, if they are ailing go bust.

Anonymous
Anonymous

I am against it.
I don't understand it all but as far as I am concerned there is no fake news!
There is only news.

We see this during this pandemic.

We have doctors against doctors and yet they were all trained in a university, so either they all test and come up with the same solutions or !!!!

My biggest against this is that it is TaxPayer funded, even if voted for... and that to me smells a bit off.

But alas... I cannot vote as a resident... oh well... lucky news people...

methownet.com
methownet.com

The residual Trump Republican power structure is extremely adverse to financially backing public media. Here in the NW American state of Washington, my Swiss wife and I listen to and support National Public Radio as supporting members, but neither own nor watch TV, not even Public TV, because it has too much advertising. We favor direct funding of Swiss and American media.

max
max

Switzerland would lose information diversity if we do not help the ailing media. This argument sounds plausible but is completely wrong. It is true that some actors are likely to disappear and their journalists would have to look for another job. Let us be clear, the media are selling news stories and bakers bread and pastries. In both cases, only those who sell better products can be successful.

On the media landscape, the good ones have a broader audience and this is exactly what advertisers want. Unpleasant stories on companies or politicians have little if any effect on the size of the audience. The fact of the matter is that especially some newspaper publishers had missed an early transition to online media. When you look at the content, you can notice that a lot is just copying and pasting articles written by news agencies. Me-to is not a recipe for success.

The media that want survive will have to do excellent journalistic work to differentiate themselves from others. Distributing subsidies would be just a waste of public money because it could nothing but sustain mediocrity. For a real information diversity, the criterion is not the numbers but the quality.

spenglermanfred@t-online.de
spenglermanfred@t-online.de
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

Dear Alpine Neighbors
I used to assume that solid state funding would also ensure solid reporting free of economic interests. The considerable GEZ contributions have, in my opinion, also achieved this to some extent in the case of ARD and ZDF. In the last decade, however, a completely different danger has emerged, namely the increasingly clear lack of a solid distance to the government. In the past, I would never have thought it possible that there could be something like "attitude journalists" in German broadcasting corporations, whose work is reflected in pro-government contributions.
This has led to the fact that, for example, critics of the government's measures to combat the pandemic or of our Ostpolitik are hardly ever, or only in small numbers, invited to talk shows of the public broadcasters. Anstalten are invited. That is regrettable, because these rounds were in former times once the signboard of the famous "Öffentrlichrechtlichen!
Today, however, these fellow citizens make the long journey to Vienna (!). On the private station Servus TV, of all places, they can express their views unhindered by calls to order in the program Talk im Turm. This robs because of the late hour of some citizen the sleep entschäidigt however because of contents. A cause for the lack of distance of the ö-r. One reason for the lack of distance between the public media and the government is probably the strong presence of political parties in the German broadcasting corporations, which the Federal Constitutional Court has tried to reduce on various occasions, unfortunately so far in vain. But I don't know whether a more party-independent structure of the stations would ensure more open and balanced reporting.
Whether the sweet subsidies of the state or the economy are more dangerous, every citizen must decide for himself.

With greetings from Bonn
from M. Spengler

Liebe Alpennachbarn
Früher nahm, ich an, dass eine solide staatliche Finanzierung auch eine solide Berichterstattung frei von wirtschaftlichen Interessen sicherstellt. Die beträchtlichen GEZ Beiträge haben dies m.E. bei der ARD und des ZDF bislang auch einigermaßen bewirkt. Im letzten Jahrzehnt hat sich freilich eine ganz andere Gefahr herausgestellt:, nämlich das immer deutlichere Fehlen einer soliden Distanz zur Regierung. Ich hätte es früher nie für möglich gehalten, dass es in deutschen Funkhäusern einmal so etwas geben könnte wie " Haltungsjournalisten" , deren Arbeit sich in regierungsfreundlichen Beiträgen niederschlägt.
Dies hat dazu geführt, dass z.B. Kritiker, der staatlichen Maßnahmen zur Pandemiebekämpfung oder zu unserer Ostpolitik kaum noch , oder nur in Unterzahl zu Gesprächsrunden der öff.recht. Anstalten eingeladen werden. Das ist bedauerlich, denn diese Runden waren früher einmal das Aushängeschild der berühmten "Öffentrlichrechtlichen!.
Heute aber begeben sich diese Mitbürger auf den weiten Weg nach Wien (!). Ausgerechnet bei dem Privatsender Servus TV können sie in der Sendung Talk im Turm ihre Auffassung frei von Ordnungsrufen ungehindert äußern . Dies raubt wegen der späten Stunde manchem Bürger den Schlaf entschäidigt aber wegen des Inhalts. Eine Ursache für die mangelnde Distanz der ö-r. Medien zur Regierung dürfte wohl in der starken Präsenz der pol. Parteien in den deutschen Funkhäusern liegen, für deren Absenkung sich das Bundeverfassungsgericht verschiedentlich eingesetzt hatte., bislang leider vergeblich. Ob bei einer parteiunabhängiigeren Struktur der Sender eine offenere und ausgewogenere Berichterstattung gesichert weiß ich aber auch nicht..
Ob nun die süßen Subventionen des Staate oder die der Wirtschaft gefährlicher sind muss jeder Bürger wohl für sich selber entscheiden .

Mit Gruß aus Bonn
von M. Spengler

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

Hello VICTORDIRECTDEMOCRATS, the new media law is not about a political orientation of individual media. Their perception is still subjective. Regardless of the positioning of a medium, the new, increased funding is intended to strengthen the diversity of different media. This is not only threatened by the appearance of big tech media like Facebook and Google. There are enough examples, unfortunately also very recent ones, which show that the dismantling of media diversity is the beginning of a synchronization of public opinion. In this respect, I see it as a very good sign that the Swiss government is willing to pay a little more for media diversity than it has in the past.

Hallo VICTORDIRECTDEMOCRATS, beim neuen Mediengesetz geht es nicht um eine politische Ausrichtung von einzelnen Medien. Deren Wahrnehmung ist ja erst noch subjektiv. Unabhänging von der Positionierung eines Mediums sollte mit der neuen, verstärkten Förderung eben gerade die Vielfalt an verschiedenen Medien gestärkt werden. Diese ist ja nicht erst durch das Auftreten der Big Tech Media wie Facebook und Google bedroht. Es gibt genügend Beispiele, leider auch sehr aktuelle, die zeigen, dass der Abbau der medialen Vielstimmigkeit der Anfang einer Gleichschaltung der öffentlichen Meinung ist. Insofern werte ich es als sehr gutes Zeichen, dass sich die Schweizer Regierung die Medienvielfalt etwas mehr kosten lassen will als bisher.

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

Hello LOL, in a functioning democracy with regular popular
referendums, the local level is central. Consequently, local media have a very important function. Why? Here, problems that directly affect people must be solved pragmatically. If there is no more local politics, the danger of division and extremes is greater. See the USA. But the model of fee-splitting that you criticize is not the subject of the vote on the new media law on March 13.

Hallo LOL, in einer funktionierenden Demokratie mit regelmässigen
Volksentscheiden ist die lokale Ebene zentral. Folglich kommt lokalen Medien eine ganz wichtige Funktion zu. Wieso? Hier müssen Probleme, die die Menschen direkt betreffen, pragmatisch gelöst werden. Gibt es keine Lokalpolitik mehr, ist die Gefahr der Spaltung und der Extreme grösser. Siehe USA. Aber das Modell des Gebührensplitting, das Sie kritisieren, ist nicht Thema der Abstimmung über das neue Mediengesetz vom 13. März.

John Beasley
John Beasley

In the US this issue is tied to money in politics. As you may know our Supreme Court defined certain kinds of political money as 'speech' therefore protected by the Constitution. This is similar to their definition of a corporation as a legal person. These legal constructs come after much argument and cogitation and are then enshrined as the legal precedent of the land. Are the rulings beyond the reach of our Congress? Will the defeat of the filibuster lead to changes in the Orwellian word play? It is interesting to think about but it looks like the filibuster will stay in place.

Victordirectdemocrats
Victordirectdemocrats

First, what does media mean? What will be the criteria? How to separate the funding from politics? Will the money also help to set up new media? Who will distribute the money? Will it be aimed at preventing monopoly or quasi-mononpoly power?

It is an interesting idea.

I do not know the situation in Switzerland; in the US, Canada, many other countries, most media are politically "contaminated", it seems many users of the media too. In those countries the media has become politically partisan, as if readers, viewers and listeners are no longer interested in unbiased infomation and independent opinion, but interested in reinforcing their point of view.

Finally, it would be interesting to see a study on how direct democracy influences the media and how the media influences Swiss direct democracy.

Thank you.

Victor Lobez

Flat Four
Flat Four
@Victordirectdemocrats

The US has PBS and NPR, and both are terribly biased. But they will not admit it.

[i]swissinfo.ch: Can you please elaborate in brief about these two instruments? Thank you.[/i]

Flat Four
Flat Four
@Flat Four

@swissinfo. If you would have published the the other half of my post, with a link to an article explaining how NPR completely fabricated a story about a supreme court justice. Then everybody will have the opportunity to see the example. I tried to provide facts, but instead was censored.

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
@Flat Four

Hallo Flat Four, PBS und NPR sind mir unbekannt - könnten Sie diese beiden Instrumente in je einem Satz erklären? Noch zum Link: Das ist keine Zensur, aber gemäss unseren Richtlinien publizieren wir in den Kommentaren keine Links. Beste Grüsse aus Bern!

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
@Flat Four

Hallo Flat Four: Danke für deine Beiträge! Den Link habe ich nicht zensiert, aber gemäss unseren editorialen Richtlinien publizieren wir in den Kommentaren keine Links. Dies, um Missbräuchen vorzubeugen. Beispielsweise gibt es Leute, die in Kommentarspalten Werbung machen, auch für zweifelhafte Geschäfte. Ich hoffe, Sie haben Verständnis und beste Grüsse aus Bern!

Flat Four
Flat Four
@Renat Künzi

Hi Renat. Thank you for taking the time to clarify why part of my comment was not published. I will remember this in the future.

Flat Four
Flat Four
@Renat Künzi

PBS is television broadcast station and NPR is a radio broadcast. Both heavily funded by the federal government. If you could watch and listen to both, they both heavily champion the ideas and causes of the democrat party. All while claiming to be unbiased.
The story I would have liked people to read was from Fox News about an NPR article. (yes, Fox is also biased, but they do not deny it) And the story has all the facts listed.

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
@Flat Four

Wir publizieren in den Kommentaren unserer Community wie schon gesagt keine Links. Aber Sie finden den von Flat Four erwähnten Artikel in der Suchmaschine mit folgenden Begriffen: Fox News, NPR, Gorsuch, Sotomayor, 100%

IanHall
IanHall

As we're seeing in the UK today, state funding can be capricious and dangerously politicised. At the same time, there is no point in sustaining forms of media that are no longer being utilised. For example, much of the proposed spend will go to knock-and-drop print newspapers which go straight to landfill unread. The government may have good intentions, but ultimately all this new initiative will do is increase state influence over media contract and prop up unsustainable models while fueling further corruption in a Swiss state where public spending is already deeply compromised. A better idea would be to disrupt the disruptors by taxing digital channels, on-line advertising and on-line sales.

LoL
LoL
@IanHall

Totally agree, I have 3 different text written all over my post saying no free newspaper, ads paper etc. Every morning at least 1 appears and goes straight to landfil as you said. I can't stop them, they are not naimly addressed so even when you contact the newspaper to stop delivering to you, they don't care and I can't stand in 6 in the morning everyday stopping the postman. I would not want such uneconomical and wistful form of news to be sponsored.

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
@IanHall

Hi Ian Hall. danke für Ihren Beitrag. In der Besteuerung gebe ich Ihnen recht. Zudem sollte es auch für die Big Tech Riesen eine verlegerische Verantwortung geben.

Gagatang1
Gagatang1
The following contribution has been automatically translated from ZH.

This topic should be divided into two separate questions.
1. does democracy require broad, timely, objective and neutral public information? Of course.
Is it only the traditional media (radio, television, newspapers) that can provide the necessary public information? Of course not, because the online media are becoming known as an important and even major source of public information.
The traditional media are inevitably being phased out by the online media. It is not wise to save the hopeless traditional media. After an open competition, the market will provide the best solution.

这个议题应分为两个独立的问题:
1. 民主需要广泛,及时,客观中立的公众信息吗?当然。
2.只有传统媒体(广播,电视,报纸)才能提供必要的公众信息吗?当然不,因为网络传媒正在称为公众信息的重要甚至主要来源。
传统传媒正在不可避免地被网络传媒逐渐。拯救无望的传统媒体是不明智的。经过开放的竞争,市场自会提供最佳方案。

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
The following contribution has been automatically translated from ZH.
@Gagatang1

Thank you very much for your contribution. I think democracy is too important for the market to regulate information alone. Who, if not the quality media, can still do elaborate and investigative research? Either the big tech media are finally regulated, or the state has to make its contribution so that citizens can make informed and qualified decisions at the ballot box. But this must have nothing to do with interference in media freedom.

Besten Dank für Ihren Beitrag. Ich halte Demokratie für zu wichtig, als dass der Markt die Information alleine regeln kann. Wer, wenn nicht die Qualitätsmedien können noch aufwändige und investigative Recherchen machen? Entweder die Big Tech Media werden endlich reguliert, oder eben der Staat muss seinen Beitrag leisten, damit Bürger:innen an der Urne informierte und qualifizierte Entscheide fällen können. Mit einer Einmischung in die Medienfreiheit darf das aber nichts zu tun haben.

Tobler
Tobler
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

A fair press is only possible if it is not dependent on advertisements. Because these demand a high audience share, and Fox News and countless American radio stations achieve this by stirring up the dissatisfied.

It is imperative that the press be supported by the state. This gives it the means to do careful research. It is constantly attacked from the right and the left, and so it remains reasonably fair and allows different views to have their say.

Eine faire Presse ist nur möglich, wenn sie nicht von Reklamen abhängig ist. Denn diese verlangen eine hohe Einschaltungquote, und das erreichen Fox News und unzählige amerikanische Radiostationen, in dem sie die Unzufriedenen aufhetzen.

Die Presse muss unbedingt staatlich unterstützt sein. Das gibt ihr die Mittel, sorgfältig zu recherchieren. Sie wird ja dauernd von rechts und links angegriffen, und so bleibt sie einigermassen fair und lässt verschiedene Ansichten zu Wort kommen

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.
@Tobler

I see it that way, too. For me, the regulation of the big tech giants is very important. They influence or distort political debates with their algorithms without having to adhere to any editorial responsibilities. This is one of the greatest dangers for democracies.

Ich sehe das auch so. Sehr wichtig ist für mich die Regulierung der Big Tech Giganten. Sie beeinflussen resp. verzerren mit ihren Algorithmen die politischen Debatten, ohne sich an jegliche editoriale Verantwortungen halten zu müssen. Das ist eine der grössten Gefahren für die Demokratien.

YERLY
YERLY
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.

Conditional support. Without COVID, a lot less media. A little less feminism would do us good. A little less radicalized Greens and Leftists would be a welcome renewal. A little more regional news, small businesses, agriculture that feeds us with great effort are expected. A little less money sport. Still a lot of work to do. Jean-Pierre Yerly

Un soutien conditionnel. Sans COVID, beaucoup moins de Média. Un peu moins de féminisme , nous ferait du bien. Un peu moins d'intervenants Verts et Gauchistes radicalisés serait un renouveau bienvenu. Un peu plus d'actualité régionale, des petites entreprises, de l'agriculture qui nous nourri avec de gros efforts sont attendus. Un peu moins de sport à fric. Encore beaucoup de travail. Jean-Pierre Yerly

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.
@YERLY

The new and higher contributions of the Swiss government are not linked to content conditions, but only to the relevance of the information. I agree with you about regional and local news, which are fundamental if democracy is to function well.

Die neuen und höheren Beiträge der Schweizer Regierung sind nicht an inhaltliche Bedingungen geknüpft, sondern nur an die Relevanz der Informationen. Bei den regionalen und lokalen Nachrichten gebe ich Ihnen recht, die sind fundamental, wenn die Demokratie gut funktionieren soll.

Anona
Anona

Media will write in favor of who funds it. That is a fact. In my opinion it should be funded by those who are interested in the truth without bias or conflicts of interest.
I was shocked the other day to read an article with media experts literally stating: “The unvaccinated are holding the entire society captive”. A statement which clearly shows the poor understanding of a complex situation. Above all, any incitation to segregate, create hate and social unrest should be considered a crime and should carry consequences for the social damage it may provoke.

Frodo
Frodo
@Anona

Ein Staat tut seit je her Menschen ausgrenzen und das nennt sich Gefängnis. Nur, in einem Gefängnis sitzen in der Regel Schwerverbrecher die eine Tat(!) begangen haben, Kinderschänden, Körperverletzung, Mord, und sich dabei mehr Freiheiten zugestanden als sie allen anderen zugestehen.
Heute werden hingegen Menschen ausgegrenzt obwohl sie nichts getan haben! Das ist keine gute "Entwicklung" für ein friedliches Miteinander und bestätigt doch die Aussage dass wir heute in einer kranken Gesellschaft mit Narzissten leben.

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
@Anona

Wir reden von der Schweiz und nicht Ungarn oder Belarus. Da der Schweizer Staat bisher keine direkte Medienförderung betreibt, gibt es noch keine Tatsachen. Und wie ich meine Kolleg:innen bei sämtlichen privaten Medien kenne, würden sie die Freiheit ihres Berufes und die Unabhängigkeit ihres Mediums mit aller Kraft verteidigen.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Sounds like the making of a propaganda machine. Will this "Swiss media" be able to report independently and objectively to challenge and hold government and other institutions to account? Will it actually be able to practice true journalism? Or will it simply pander to those who fund it and promote false narratives to comply with the state? It doesn't sound particularly promising to anyone who cares about truth and impartiality.

Frodo
Frodo
@Anonymous

Was und wer ist der Staat?
Ein Bundesrat kann sagen und anordnen was er will, er verkörpert nicht den Staat wenn er gegen die Staatsraison oder gegen den Staat agiert.

HAT
HAT

Is it humanly possible to receive MONEY (funding) from "someone", and then make a report which can show the "someone" in bad light?

If this century-old dilemma can be resolved, let me be the first one to applaud it.

The government should finance more the media but there must be strict and transparent rules to ensure the mass media (newspapers) can be independent and report as neutrally as possible.

It is definitely as theoretical as it can get.

Whoever controls the news controls the world.

Frodo
Frodo
@HAT

In einer gesunden Welt sollte jeder jeden kritisieren können, dies alleine schon als Narzissmus-Prävention und sie auf den Boden der Realität zurück zu holen. Idealer Weise sollte die Kritik ehrlich, faktenbasiert und wohlwollend sein auch wenn es sich für den Kritisierten nicht so anfühlt.

Daher sollten auch die Medien, wenn sie Geld vom Staat erhalten, auch den Staat kritisieren dürfen.

Es gibt zwas das Sprichwort "man beisst nicht die Hand die einem füttert". Das gilt für manche Tiere. Manche kleine Menschenkinder beissen ihre Mutter. Und dennoch lieben die Mütter ihre Kinder. Oder manche Katzen kratzen und beissen ihre Katzenliebhaberin und dennoch mag die Frau die Katze. Oder bei Tierärzten wo machen Tiere sich unmöglich verhalten und dennnoch hilft man ihnen. Nicht kritisieren dürfen ist so gesehen gegen die Naturgesetze. Es stellt sich daher die Frage wie sehr krank ein System ist wenn keine Kritik toleriert wird. 

Renat Künzi
Renat Künzi SWI SWISSINFO.CH
@HAT

Ich wünschte, Sie hätten etwas mehr Vertrauen in die Journalistinnen und Journalisten in der Schweiz, die jeden Tag mit guten und kritisch recherchierten Beiträgen ihre Freiheit und Unabhängigkeit unter Beweis stellen. Wie ich sie einschätze, würden sie sich nie im Leben eine Intervention aus Bern gefallen lassen. Und falls es doch mal eine solche gäbe, würden sie das wohl sofort publik machen - und der Absender riskiert einen Rohrkrepierer.

PASSERBY2
PASSERBY2

No. Media financed by the state inevitably devolve into shameful propaganda of any political party which is currently in power. This leads to hiring of low quality journalists who support the party line, and public arguments whenever, inevitably, the party controlling the public media is no longer supported by majority of voters. I don't understand why anybody both criticizes state-owned media in Russia or China and wants the same model in Switzerland

Victordirectdemocrats
Victordirectdemocrats
@PASSERBY2

It is not logical to compare publicly funded, or even publicly owned media in Swrtzerland with China or Russia. China is clearly a dictatorship. Russia is a quasi-dictatorship with the forms of a democracy.

In Switzerland privat media have freedom, although I suppose they are not always independent. As for the public RTS, it may certain bias to left or right, I do not know, but considering than in the Swiss executive, and in parliament, major parties of the Left and the Right play a major role, I would be very surprised if RTS is very biased.

External Content
Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Almost finished... We need to confirm your email address. To complete the subscription process, please click the link in the email we just sent you.

The latest debates

The newest opportunities to discuss and debate key topics with readers from around the world

Biweekly

The SBC Privacy Policy provides additional information on how your data is processed.

SWI swissinfo.ch - a branch of Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG SSR

SWI swissinfo.ch - a branch of Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG SSR