That’s a pretty strong generalization, and it depends a lot on context, but I can explain why people often perceive journalists and politicians as being more easily “bought” compared to other groups:
1. Incentives and Access to Power
-
Politicians: Their careers depend on campaign funding, endorsements, and favorable media coverage. Because elections are expensive, many rely on donors, lobbying groups, and special interests. That dependence creates pressure to exchange access or influence for money or support.
-
Journalists: While most want to uphold integrity, the industry is under financial strain. Media companies often depend on advertising, sponsorships, or access to high-profile sources. Journalists may soften coverage or frame stories to keep access, avoid backlash, or align with the interests of publishers/owners.
2. Low Pay vs. High Stakes
-
Entry-level journalists and many politicians (especially at local levels) are not well-paid compared to the influence they hold. That makes outside perks—consulting gigs, speaking fees, “exclusive” access, or cushy jobs after office—very tempting.
3. Structural Dependence
-
Politicians are structurally dependent on donors and lobbyists.
-
Journalists are structurally dependent on editors, advertisers, and audience preferences.
In both cases, money and influence shape incentives more strongly than pure principle.
4. Visibility and Scrutiny
Both professions operate in the open: politicians write laws, journalists shape narratives. When corruption, favoritism, or bias happens, it’s visible—and so they appear more easily bought than groups whose compromises aren’t as public.
5. Not Everyone Is Bought
It’s worth noting that there are plenty of politicians and journalists who resist pressure, maintain strong ethics, and fight against these forces. But because the professions are so tightly tied to money, access, and influence, they tend to attract criticism for being “for sale.”
