In theory, yes. In the real world that actually exists, however, the media supports the politicized choices of the government and makes the civil public focus on some other insignificant story, letting the government do whatever they want unopposed.
And then, because the government has no incentive to make their public record easy to understand, they will force the average person to go through a complicated process just to obtain the records in the first place, and then the records are way too complicated to understand. There goes your transparency.
Further, even if the public started complaining directly to the politicians, the government could put a "private" system in place, like the Fed. Create a private institution that has all the benefits of a government organization, and is just as mandatory as a government institution, but now the government can say that the institution is private, so they can't open it up to the public. And then the election comes around so the media hypes up that insignificant story I was talking about and everyone forgets about civil liberties and personal choice.
Why would the media be more subservient to the government than to any other large establishment figure? Do I think the government would deal with things in a necessarily clear way. No, but I believe that they would deal with things in a clearer way than the private sector does in this case.
How do you feel about the FCC?
The FCC is a different case. I don't agree with its decisions, since they are usually based on unconstitutional views on obscenity, but I don't object to the body itself, since its jobs is to monitor the public airwaves, which certain companies have been given the privilege to use.
--
My bracket wasn't good enough to beat SuperNiceDog's in the GameFAQS Rivalry Rumble. Congrats!
This is Yesmar.