Why do you think journalists should provide a public forum - a marketplace of ideas?

Journalism needs to provide a public forum now more than ever before, but it must be just that: a marketplace of ideas, not a boxing ring.  In the age of 24/7 news and an abundance of talk shows, the public seems to be shouting and arguing more, and analyzing and compromising less.  The country of America was built on a real public forum, with many able to voice their ideas in the newspapers of the time and discuss the changes they felt needed to be made.  These ideas would be distributed across the colonies and others were able to learn and build on them, eventually leading to the foundation of a government that would become a new world super power.

This spirit of compromise is what the public needs again.  It wasn't easy for many back then, and it won't be easy now, but it is necessary.  Most major broadcast news organizations have a clear bias, and in 2006, 40% of all cable television were talk shows - shows pandering to those who simply wanted their opinion repeated to them by their news.  The unfortunate thing is that these sell and do well.  Sometimes it seems the public forum has simply digressed into the public searching for either entertainment or their opinions validated by an authority source.

However, without a true public forum, the public will become ignorant and complacent if they take their example from the pundits who deliver this type of "news".  If journalists refuse to distribute unbiased and uncensored facts, the public will, instead of learning to entertain and consider different opinions and values, only learn to argue.

Yesterday, I discovered who Ann Coulter was: a political and controversial pundit for Fox News who has written several books essentially blaming liberals for everything wrong with America.  I was shocked and appalled.  I have never heard more idiotic statements come out of a news personnel's mouth, which is really saying something.  It is people like her who completely shut down the public forum created by journalism and make it a battle between two sides.  Unfortunately, her books are bestsellers.

As I was giving up on the idea of an intelligent public forum in major news corporations, I came across an article by a woman who describes how she goes through the letters and emails sent to the Boston Globe by citizens who are genuinely concerned with serious issues and wish them to be discussed.  And I realized, although, perhaps, so many biased and idiotic people get attention, there are so many intelligent, regular citizens who truly rely on good journalists to accurately inform them of the truth.  As an aspiring journalist, I have decided that I will always produce work that creates the opportunity for intelligent and lively discussion that will enact change if need be. Because that is the true reason why journalists should provide a public forum.  Just like in the early days of our country, words are powerful.  However, the public must be able to compromise and discuss them in a rational way, and only then can change happen.