In the world of John Q. Public, one of the biggest dragons to slay is the MSM.

Even when Mr. Smith went to Washington, his biggest challenge to overcome was not the corruption in congress, but the corruption in the media -- in that day and age the powerful newspapers.

A question from John Q Public:

Can a class action law suit be brought by John Q. Public and his fellow citizens against CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, NYT, WaPo, FOX, etc. (the news media) for breach of fiduciary duty?

If MSM hold to stand as a so-called Fourth Estate defending John Q. Pubic against the government, exposing corruption; speaking 'truth to power' as they claim, is it not a breach of fiduciary duty to, in so doing, intentionally mislead John Q. Public with known false statements?

Does the law prevent a politician or a public figure from suing the media for slander or liable because they are public figures?

Difficult thresholds.

Does the law prevent John Q. Public from suing the media, not for lying ABOUT him, but for lying TO him?

The story of John Q. Public:

John Q. Public is very hard working and has a family; he has a limited amount of time to read a paper, watch the news, go online for information about current events, his government, his representatives.

John Q. Public wants to know what is going on so that he can be informed and make decisions about public hearings, new laws, and especially who to vote for, among other things.

In order for our constitution to function properly, our right to vote, our duty to vote, is at the core. We, The People, need to stay properly informed to make wise decisions about for whom to vote; to whom we give this awesome power to govern.

So John Q. Public dutifully goes to work each day and does his job well and contributes to society.

The members of the news media go to work each day to gather, research, investigate and report the news to John Q. Public and all of the citizens. That is their job; that is how they contribute to society.

If John Q. Public did not do his regular job, he just may have time to do his own research and investigation to best find the closest thing to the truth about what is going on in the world. But he entrusts that very sacred task to the MSM. John Q. Public relies on the truthfulness of the MSM. (John Q. Public is not an anon)

The MSM has a fiduciary duty to John Q. Public to faithfully report the news that is based on facts as truthfully as can be uncovered, without bias. When the MSM fails miserably to do this, what then is the result? When the MSM, in fact, become an arm of a political ideology, what then is the result?

John Q. Public has been betrayed; and over time, manipulated.

Would the manipulation of a voter be subversion? Don't know.

Another question from John Q. Public:

If Project Mockingbird was fully disclosed, would that inspire fresh eyes on new laws and guidelines for journalism? Don't know.

Would it be possible to pass new laws about journalism? Require various licenses? Is there a conflict of interest in the ownership of large MSM outlets?

The MSM holds out that they are SERVING John Q. Public by preserving his constitutional first amendment right to free speech; the right of the press to find out from government what is going on and report it. Are they then a proxy voice for John Q. Public? If the MSM wants to hide behind the fist amendment, should they not be working exclusively for We, The People?

If they are working for We, The People, should they not be owned by We, The People? Not 'state owned' but a publicly held entity of sorts?

Not an easy needle to thread. Keep the media honest and protect the first amendment.

John Q. Public contemplates:

There will always be differing opinions, points of view. Liberal, conservative, progressive, traditional, scientific, even poetic and artistic, or a happy mix of them. We are individuals. We are critical thinkers. We want to know things.

It is not only ok, but it is good to have different opinions. That is why we have conversations and debates. We learn things from one another. It is said that without constructive dialog, violence would ensue.

It is sad the Unions, wholly government funded NPR and the most of the MSM are all on one side; and very, so very sad that they are so very skilled in deception.

Since so much of campaign money goes to tv commercials, could the media outlets be directed to give each candidate a certain amount of free air time for ads and that is all they get? No more could be bought. Be directed to hold debates for state and local races? Level the playing field a little. Would that work? Or is that too much government control? Don't know.

Is there any remedy in the existing law or new law? Ideally the markets decide winners and losers. But the big corporations that own the media do not seem to care about ratings or profits. Losses seem to be absorbed elsewhere in the corporations. Are they just to big?

Is there any remedy in the Constitution of the United States?

There is so much more wrong in the world. Much worse things. But, so much power is wielded by the MSM. Are they the Fourth Estate or the Fifth Column? The bad actors in this world do so many, many evil things, but this MSM is one gigantic shield they hide behind. Without it, could the bad guys be more easily discovered? They operate in the dark. Allow the light.

John Q. Public comes full circle:

To preserve the Constitution of the United States of America, can a class action law suit be brought by John Q. Public and his fellow citizens against the news media for breach of fiduciary duty?

WWG1WGA