In France : https://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/cartes/PPA
They're lobbying for laws, supporting political parties, and even influencing orthodox economic theories and their spread.
They're also buying publishing houses, survey institutes, and even journalist schools.
That's how you can find people who claim to be neither from the left or the right, but are only knowing/regurgitating opinions broadcasted in the capitalist-owned state(, e.g., solve the deficit by lowering the number of public servants and selling public companies, instead of taxing the billionaires and fighting tax fraud&schemes, after all they're the ones creating jobs and working enough hours to deserve millions, and they'll leave the country if we tax them, not seeing the problem with this race to the bottom).
Just a reminder of our hypocrisy when we're criticizing the state's Pravda while our laws allow the Pravda of the millionaires.
Worker's owned medias and companies would be the obvious third way to private//public ones, or at least the three types in a relative equal mesure, but not >90% of capitalist-owned medias. We could/should also finally accomplish the pluralism that we're so proud of and makes us a "democracy" better than the dictatorships allegedly specialized in brainwashing their citizens(, otherwise how could the authentic popular support be explained, they still need to be sanctioned/invaded/liberated). Concretely, we could give ~100€ every year to our citizens, and let them choose/vote to which newspaper such sum should be allocated, among other ideas. Perhaps that communist newspapers/radios/ideas would finally appear instead of the pseudo-objectivity owned by the wealthiest, who even knows what socialism or capitalism means, and why 'passive incomes'/'lucrative properties' are a theft of the workers, for example ? Or any argument from our enemies, whose narrative is systematically silenced.
Some claim that our freedom of speech on the internet will make such ideas re-emerge, but they've already successfully censored any terrorist point of view, and are still not satisfied, making more than clear that their objective is to control what is said on the internet(, "FReEdOm of SpEecH BuT nOT freEDOm oF ConSeQUEnceS"), this year they're focused on the end of online anonymity, last year it was disinformation and the year before it was hate speech.
Anyway, what was interesting/new here was the mention of social medias, but having a majority of 'workers/readers'-owned mainstream medias is just one more thing that will never happen. Most socialist and republican newspapers belonged to their journalists in the XIXth century.
Just don't doubt that our system is the best, and that we should destroy any country aiming for a different one.

Ah, the joke in the verb "see" :) ?
No, I said that the problem isn't on those platforms, not that I am not.
It's roughly analagous with "this sign can't stop me, cause I can't read"?
I'm afraid that i'll annoy you by trying to understand, but if you're willing to answer :
The problem is the ownership by one wealthy guy(, with the class/selfish interests we know), instead of, e.g., the users or kinda nobody like f.o.o.s. software.
So the problem is on these platforms ?
Please correct me if i'm missing something, or not, sry for insisting.
dies of cringe (No worries, comrade.)
The joke is that exactly due to corporate ownership of these platforms and outlets the joke's main character can't see this being discussed on these platforms and outlets as a problem. And the joke's main character doesn't read anything else.
The joke is that they looked at these sites and none of them said there's a problem. This is funny because of course these sites will not say that it is a problem that they are owned by billionaires for the obvious reason that they are owned and controled by billionaires.
This is what this post is about that control of info by the ruling class means that people won't see info about why that's a problem.
It's okay if you don't get it. But that's all they were doing is making a joke
Yeah, ok, now that you say it it's obvious : this problem isn't (talked about )on these sites and newspapers, so we don’t see it
Thanks for explaining 👍