Because the public getting to decide how to spend their own tax dollars is the bare minimum standard for calling something a democracy. Dictating that the public must spend tax dollars on things they do not support is completely unlike constitutional protections on minorities

This is a strong assertion that serves more as a declaration of ideology than an argument.

What country has a "fourth estate" in its constitution? And who decided that journalists are it?

I'm not really interested in the particular, as mentioned above. The point is how systems behave in the real world, with real world actors, with real world feedback loops and incentive structures, not counter-productive excursions into legalisms.

The failure modes I describe are real and actually happened. I'm not terribly interested in litigating the ideological framework that produced them - ye shall know them by their fruits and all that.

I'd invite you to read my longer comment above if you'd like to learn more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49563762