In our democratic society, the freedom of the press clause in the First Amendment is to protect the right of citizens to have their own publications even if they criticize the political power. In contrast, a partisan press system– such as of Nazi and the Soviet Union–can degenerate into lying propaganda with the purpose of disinforming and depoliticizing the citizens rather than encouraging them in the political process.
Like historians, journalists have the responsibility to distance themselves from their own political views and interests, from their own culture and religion. In our democratic society, they have the freedom of expression and can criticize their own society; they have the responsibility to pursue the truth, to present real facts, and to tell their audience what actually happened.
The basic questions of journalism criticism are: What is the relationship between journalism and influential sources? Do journalists have direct influence in politics or vice versa? Who controls the public domain? The main idea is that in democracy, the public should have open access to public institutions and resources for information, including journalism. Thus, access to journalism should be open to all citizens (Jankowski, Nicholas: Reflections on the Origins and Meanings of Media Access, Javnost/The Public 2, 1995). There should be a dialogue between Journalism and the public, a “real conversation”, debate, and discussion about the communities that journalism addresses (Park, Robert Ezra, 1941).
Criticism should be a part of the news reporting and writing process even though the journalists are accused of being unprofessional and attempting to include their own views in the news when they raise issues that the people in power are not debating but rather manipulating them in their interests. At the same time, journalism should not be confused with criticism. journalism should be “reality –based reporting” as opposed to opinion journalism:
Posted by nicusuciu 
nicusuciu
