Democracy is impossible without a free press. At least courts and commentators tell us so. Justice Murphy expressed the common sentiment when he stated, “A free press lies at the heart of our democracy and its preservation is essential to the survival of liberty.” Justice Frankfurter stated simply that “[a] free press is indispensable to the workings of our democratic society.” More strikingly, James Madison claimed that “[a] popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both.” Despite deploring “the putrid state into which our newspapers have passed,” Jefferson argued that “our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

This consensus, however, floats above crucial but more controversial matters. What type of free press does democracy need and why does democracy need it? Answers to these questions would allow the necessary follow-up questions. Are existing media adequate? Do they provide for the informational or communication needs of democracy? And if not, in what way do they fail, and what can be done? If there are inadequacies, do they reflect bad decisions made by media professionals, such that the prime need is for better, smarter, tougher editors and reporters or better training in journalism schools? Or do inadequacies reflect, at least in part, deeper structural problems? And if governmental policy correctives are necessary to make matters better, what interventions would promote a more “democratic press” – that is, a press that properly serves a society committed to democracy?