Yes. It is much like your SCOTUS. Right wing governments stack the board with right wing directors.
I recall that in the UK, Maragaret Thatcher passed a law that if the BBC made any documentaries that lacked "balance" then they had to restore the "balance" by making another documentary that took the opposite tack. The media reported on this law without the scorn that would have been appropriate. The blindingly obvious question is Who gets to say what is balance?
I moved from England to Australia in 2002, i.e. during the propaganda build up to the Iraq war. The Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC - Australia's BBC) went along with the propaganda build up, as they always have done. They presented USA accusations on Iraq as if they were fact. They almost completely forgot to point out facts that would have exposed the build up of lies. But they were slighly less gung ho about supporting Washington's propaganda than the commercial media outlets.
After Iraq's destruction, the now war criminal prime minister John Howard ordered an inquiry into the ABC, alleging bias. (Good lord! We know it biased, but what John Howard was objecting to was that it was not sufficiently biased enough.)
Since then, funding for the ABC has been cut by the right wing several times, and more right wing people have been elected to the board. The ABC knows which side its bread is buttered on. The corporations that own the media, thereby control the government, and the government (including the government owned media) does the bidding of the corporations.
So evidently during the destruction of Libya, the role of NATO in the was a "humanitarian" role. And evidently Australia's air-force was sent recently to bomb only ISIS in Syria. No mention of Australia being there to help overthrow the Syrian government for the benefit of Israel.
Watching politicians dance to the tune of the media, it should become obvious that the democracy is no longer for and by the people, but for and by those who own the media. But having a government owned and controlled media is quite possibly even worse. Any democracy that has media ownership only by the government or by a handful of corporations is a broken democracy.
Media ownership is very special. It is not the same as owning a factory. It is an important pillar of any real democracy. It cannot be left for a handful of corporations or even for the 1% to control.
I would like to propose limited private media ownership. Each media outlet (TV station, newspaper, etc) needs to have a given number of shares, according to the count of its readership, or audience size. The proposed limitation is simply this:- Only human beings may own media shares (i.e. not corporate persons), and one person may not own more than a single media share. This way there will be no media power brokers, and Monsanto or rich bankers will not tell the media what it has to say.