新聞自由被視為自由民主國家的一個關(guān)鍵屬性, 它提供許多民主目標(biāo)包括告知公眾和監(jiān)督政府. 建立在這個假設(shè)上，政府新聞應(yīng)該堅持的自由程度有著持久的辯論。包括自由主義理論,關(guān)鍵角度的多元化和結(jié)構(gòu)化的多元化都是爭論的焦點。然而,盡管有理論依據(jù)證實民主新聞辯論是很重要的，意識到理論與現(xiàn)實世界之間的差距也是至關(guān)重要的。本文認(rèn)為:如果不考慮媒體系統(tǒng)的實際情況，純粹提倡自由媒體市場或國家是無用的。盡管如此,在理論層面上,本文認(rèn)為民主新聞市場可能更糟：媒體系統(tǒng)被市場引導(dǎo)卻沒有內(nèi)在責(zé)任或者想要參與公眾之中，而高壓政權(quán)總是面臨著民主的阻力。
 
The free press has been perceived as a key attribute of liberal democracies, for it serves many democratic goals including informing the public and monitoring the government. Building upon this presumption, there are continuous debates on the extent of freedom from the government the press should uphold. Theories including liberalism, the critical perspective, pluralism and structured pluralism (Curran and Seat on 2003; Hallin2000; Thompson 1995 ) all played a part in this debate. However, while having theoretical bases for the debates on democratic journalism  is important, it is also crucial to recognize the gap between theoretical models and the real world.  This essay argues: it is of little use to advocate either a free media market or a state - intervened media system without taking into account the context. Nonetheless, on a theoretical level, this essay suggests that the market could be worse for democratic journalism: a media system driven by the market has no intrinsic responsibility or interest to engage the public in democratic participation, whereas oppressive regimes always faced democratic resistance s 1 . Other than looking at the classical debates of liberalism and the critical perspective, the essay would also look at the processes of news making and audience’s responses and how regional differences must be taken into account.
 
The classical liberal theory  argues that a free press separated from the state  would bring  about democratic journalism; however, many of the liberalist assumptions of the role of  media are no longer true ,  if they ever were . The term “democratic journalism” refers to  the type of journalism entailing a political responsibility to encourage civic participation;  different from “free press”, democratic journalism endeavors in helping to create and  maintain a democratic society.  The liberal model first emerged in the mid - Victoria era, or  even earlier (Curran and Sea ton 2003: 341). This classic model argues that the press has  four key functions  in the society: 1) Inform the public, 2) scrutinize the government, 3)  stage public debates and 4) express a wide variety of public opinion (341). The media,  therefore, is considered as the “watchdog” of the government, free from influences of the  state and political parties, and exist as independent agents  for the freedom of speech (Hallin2000:90) . The liberal model also  portrays the state as  the “ enemy ” (Waisbord2007: 117) o f democratic press, as if all sorts of state intervention are bad for the media.  Had the free press really fulfilled these  democratic  functions envisaged by the liberal  model, there  would be little doubt that the free press is  also  a democratic press. However,  in reality, much have changed since the model was first  constructed in the Victorian era; also, researches have shown the press often does not represent the public, nor does it have  a responsibility to encourage democratic participation.