Topic: We should subsidize journalism

Argument: subsidizing journalism would encourage more people to go into the field.

Argument: subsidizing journalism would eventually lead to biased news and articles

Argument: subsidizing journalism would give the government control over it

Argument: subsidizing journalism would help those journalists on a lower income to carry on working.

Argument: subsidizing journalism would lead to nothing but manipulating journalists and leaving the general public unable to trust in them.

Argument: subsidizing journalism would make it beholden to the current administration and the integrity would decline.

Argument: subsidizing journalism would make it more efficient.

Argument: Subsidizing journalism would result in pro-government bias. Journalists would be less comfortable criticizing the government so as not to"bite the hand that feeds them".

Argument: subsidizing would create biased reporting.

Argument: subsidizing would help the struggling press remain afloat in this technology age

Argument: supporting journalism is obligatory in our democracy society and `free speech` should be defended and approved by all means.

Argument: supporting journalism makes sense because people want and need correct facts

Argument: susidizing journalism can allow more diverse points of view to be added.

Argument: the distribution of knowledge and news is important

Argument: the federal government can't afford to bail out newspapers.

Argument: The government is too debt-burdened. It can't afford to subsidize journalism.

Argument: the is enough money in journalism already, and funds available through subsidies should be redirected towards more worthwhile causes such as healthcare.

Argument: the journalism won't be able to be trusted. it could be biased depending on who does the subsidising.

Argument: the reporting of news is an important service

Argument: there are many sectors need subsidizing more than journalism, journalists already make good money, more money to them will be a waste.

Argument: there are more important issues like health and safety to to spend our money on than journalism

Argument: there are too many news outlets already so we don't need to keep sinking money into journalists

Argument: there is no need to subsidize journalism: supply and demand will adjust market.

Argument: there is simply no need, there is enough money in journalism and plenty of valuable, objective sources available

Argument: this would encourage bright new journalists into the profession

Argument: this would only hurt the field as a whole.

Argument: this would provide more accurate and less biased opinions.

Argument: Too many journalists sensationalize the news and outright lie to their audience; they are not to be trusted.

Argument: we already are in high enough debt, we don't need to make it worse be subsidizing pointless things.

Argument: we don't subsidize other fields so why should we subsidize journalism

Argument: we need high quality journalism to combat corruption in our nation

Argument: We need journalists to help keep the government in check and bring to light abuses of power.