Sure they can refuse access to the building but journalists can't opt out of their First Amendment rights so the consideration for this agreement is void and the whole thing isn't worth the paper it's written on... Any US constitutional scholars welcome to correct me here.

Maybe he's been watching "The Hack" @itvx.com @hackedoff.bsky.social

He seems to have adopted @mediareformuk.bsky.social platform...

He said “transparency of sources of ownership, accountability, quality and objectivity” as key to news media. “One form of active citizenship is to value and support ... agencies that demonstrate seriousness and true freedom in their work ... a virtuous circle that benefits society as a whole.”

From @hackedoff.bsky.social Nathan Sparkes latest piece in Common Ground
bit.ly/4obg6p7

For the full @itvnewspolitics.bsky.social interview, watch here youtu.be/A9AkTVtd6yE?...

Media, be it news or entertainment, is very expensive to produce. Sometimes the risk pays off, but most of the time it doesn't. Only the extremely wealthy can weather the sunk costs and they do so because of the second order benefits, i.e. to yield influence, not because media is good business.

Media barons are nothing new, studios and papers have always existed to promote the agenda of their owners. What's breaking is the illusion that free market capitalism would produce plurality and editorial independence.

I write more about this in my latest post for Common Ground lexiekirkconnellkawana.substack.com/p/online-hat...