The Pew Research Center sent your editor a survey on the current state of journalism.

In gathering the thoughts of those in media on the current state of media, the survey asked: What is the media doing the best?

Getting millions of people to focus on and obsess over the desired topic of the day, whether that be COVID-19, Black Lives Matter or Ukraine, I replied.

What is the media doing the worst?

Including a variety of voices that do not fit into their predetermined narrative.

Then, what gave me pause—

Select one:

People should be allowed to practice journalism without needing a license

People should be required to have a license in order to practice journalism

What?!

Are there really enough people out there who think a “journalism license” is a good idea to even justify asking that question?

Of course journalists should not have to have a license.

And I would hope, I would think, most in media would absolutely refuse to entertain the idea of the government granting certain “system approved” individuals a “journalism license” while denying it to others. Nonsense. Unconstitutional. There is no need for government oversight of the free press in such a way in my country.

That said, I would highly recommend that all journalists take a moment to reflect upon some of the core principles of the discipline, further their training and renew their commitment to report honestly and completely, ask tough questions, explore various sides of complex and sensitive issues, and engage in telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth rather than engaging in mass manipulation.

I am curious to hear your take on the state of the modern media, your concerns about press freedom in the U.S., how social media has impacted journalism, the presence of false and fabricated information and other issues, and to discover the forthcoming results of the survey.

Speaking of media freedom issues, certain members of Congress think that somehow they have the authority to regulate what Facebook can or cannot censor, remove, post, flag or allow on its platform.

Now, I am really not a huge Facebook fan; its disappearance would probably make my existence better.

Neither am I really a huge fan of the government recently.

I’d say I am roughly equally skeptical of both big tech and big government at this time, making me something of an unaffiliated observer in this heavyweight fight.

But in this case—in considering the idea from Sen. Bill Hagerty and others that Congress, rather than Facebook, should set the rules on what the social media company can or can’t allow on its site—I say “Freedom for Facebook!”

The idea that regulating and telling an outlet what it can share and what rules it must follow is somehow standing up for free speech (possibly because some of the politicians want Facebook to share more of their ideas without them paying for the service) seems misguided and, in fact, anti-free-speech.

What if they get it in their head that they can tell the Pulse what to print!?

Thanks to all of the local candidates for public office who chose to use the Murfreesboro Pulse to communicate with the voters of Rutherford County—specifically, as of this April edition, Royce Johnson, Tom Sissom, Robin Eades Gentry and Virgil Gammon. Your support of a local small business as part of your campaign strategy is noticed and valued.

To the candidates who pour their entire marketing budgets into Facebook and the Postal Service, I question their real commitment to the local economy.

A happy spring to you all!

Look to this edition of the Pulse for ideas on garden centers, farmers markets, wedding venues, outdoor festivals, concerts and other spring-like things to get into.