I just ran into Michael Arrington, who although he is a tech journo, still has an eye for a story. He was in a Davos session led by Jeff Jarvis when Columbia President Lee Bollinger piped up about government-funded journalism:

When the business model of “real journalism” fails, what should society do in response? When things are considered important, but can’t be supported with a business model, government sometimes steps in. National parks, highways, police and national defense are all examples. Should print journalism be next?

Last week Ralph Whitehead wrote about the issue for the Boston Globe, but said government must not step in. Today at a session led by Jeff Jarvis at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, noted Free Speech lawyer and Columbia University President Lee Bollinger said it should be considered as a viable solution to the problem. Carl Lavin at Forbes picked up the story, and I’m now squarely in the middle of it.

At first Bollinger only mentioned it as an idea put forward by others. When I questioned him, he said he supported the notion.

The idea is both dangerous and absurd. For Bollinger, who is a free speech advocate, to even consider the idea suggests he hasn’t thought through the consequences of the government financing the press. Freedom of the press is one of the most important checks on government. If they’re paying the bills, the press is no longer independent.

Even from the Swiss Alps, I can see Steve B at Future of News (link on the right) lighting up. Meanwhile, Carl Lavin asks for reaction from Nick Lemann.