Of course it's only "bad" journalism if the goal is to have informed citizens. If you want citizens distracted by trivia, so you can rob them blind, and control them, then everything's going just peachy isn't it.

Get Dish network, pay the thirty bucks @ mo., so you can watch Free Speech TV, and Link TV...with commercial free programming, including Denocracy Now, and other progressive news broadcasts,,,,,well worth money, and getting better every day.

disclaimer - I don't work for Dish Network, and I have no financial interest in them.

P.S. don't forget to send your donation to Link TV and FSTV,..... even if it's the rent money.

As Ben Bagdikian has been pointing out in the various editions of his book THE NEW MEDIA MONOPOLY, the journalistic profession has been in steady decline for the past twenty-five years (at least)and the culprit is increased consolidation by corporations whose mission is to sell products while they mislead, distract and trivialize. AN INFORMED POPULATION IS THE ENEMY OF THESE PROFITEERS AND THE POLITICIANS THEY BUY. Democracy Now is my primary news source on television, and then I read periodicals, Commondreams, Truthdig, Huffington Post and books. I watch the local TV news get the weather and info about road closings.

Journalism, like all our major institutions, will be recruited by our empire when needed to further the needs of the empire. It shouldn't surprise anyone. It's happening right in front of us.
Hoa binh

The "best" media always was and still is the printed media, just as what you see here on CD or in newspaper editorial section. No distractions of faces, or voices, or body language, or moving images.

Words are "chosen" in print to convey a thought, not just blurted out in an expressive schtick to create an "image" (think Conan or Letterman) or lost behind another video look at say, those alleged terror students training their arms and agility on that horizontal ladder thing.

Printed words are just better. Imagine, for instance, how much more substantive our presidential debates would be if the candidates just blogged in their responses, like here.
It'll never happen. But it would be more informative.

I don't think Sean has not quite figured out that with the internet, there is a wider variety of newspapers available to anyone with access. Everyday, I skim through the on line versions of a good dozen -- some American, others European, and the odd Australasian. Having access to Toronto's Globe and Mail, Britain's quality papers, Le Monde, ABC in Spain, so on is actually an improvement over some of the papers that have cut back or gone away.

"Less than one person in five believes what he reads in print..... (and) nearly nine out of ten Americans believe journalists are actively biased."

The link to the Newsweek article in Sean Gonsalves' interesting piece doesn't help much, but I sure would like to understand the context on the studies involved here. If less than one person in five believes what he reads - or hears regurgitated back on talk radio and television - then how could George Bush and Karl Rove ever have persuaded close to 70% of the American public with their fall, 2002 agitprop blitz that we had to invade Iraq in order to prevent Saddam from slipping Osama a nuke to use as Chapter II of their perfidious 9/11 attack?

It must be repetition over time, from overlapping media sources, that overcomes the healthy, basic skepticism of news consumers. If so, reversing the process (so that 70% of the public now believe invading Iraq was a big mistake) is an even more difficult, time consuming, and labor intensive process.

Gonsalves' first point is very important and well taken: fewer print reporters means less investigative leg work. As a result, the whole media spectrum gets shorted and ultimately starved for reliable, reality- based news content. All that's left to fill the air time and pages between the adds is fluffy infotainment.

Gonsalves' other point about the outrageous recent ABC primary debate I think is a bit off the mark, however. To me, the real issue is how and why "candidates are pilloried with red-herring inconsequential GOP talking points" by "newsmen" like Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulus in the first place.

NPR confirmed yesterday that Stephanopolous was fed the anti-Obama angle about Chicagoan George Ayers' affiliation with the Weather Underground over 40 years ago by Sean Hannity earlier that day. While interviewing George S. on his show, right wing pundit Hannity was making all the usual whines about why the mainstream media was covering up and failing to cover this particular red herring.

So Stephanopoulous obliged him.

To me, that's what's worthy of critical evaluation, especially when the Ayers connection comes migrating into the domain of responsible partisan discourse through the same sewer channel as the earlier flotsam about Indonesian madrassas, oaths of office taken on the Koran, flag lapel pins, and the archived sermon snippets of Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

Either ABC should cease serving as a naked shill for Rupert Murdoch, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and the like, or else this process of old gossip and flat out lies being transmorgraphied into a fair subject for candidate debate forums should become a two-way street.

If George Bush can blow off press inquiry into his youthful dabbling in coke or drunk driving scrapes and the media poo-bahs quietly acquiesce, then why is similar journalistic courtesy not extended to Barack Obama?

Or alternatively, in one of the October 2008 Presidential debates, will the nation be exposed to hearing John McCain explain his deep regrets over choice of wording when he once lost his temper while being teased about hair loss, and called his own wife a four-letter word beginning in C?

What our democracy needs is more genuine investigative journalists, more economically independent news sources, and fewer double standards when it comes to the treatment of political candidates.

Bill from Saginaw

Actually, vinlander, you are mistaken. There's been plenty of studies done about this mostly Poynter and the Project for Excellence in Journalism, finding that with such severe staff cuts and the consolidation of media companies, though there is greater access to news, much of it is the same. In fact, there is less variety today, than there used to be. One example: many papers are closing bureaus, including foreign bureaus, which means when something in that area happens, more and more papers are forced to rely on AP or other wire services. I could go on but you should really check this out. There is less news variety than ever!

I stopped paying to be propagandized by newspapers and television long ago, nor do I listen to government propaganda, NPR propaganda, or public television propaganda. I do manage to remain informed through library journals, and the net. I am amused by the thought of the ignorant, misinformed, and propagandized talking heads shouting at each other until either a stroke or heart failure removes them. I often do wonder who the last man shouting will be, lol.

The communists had Pravda. The nazis had the Volkischer Beobachter. We have all that rolled into one massive, overwhelming and gut churning lump called the MSM, a poison tree with many, many roots. This is where almost all Americans get their smiley face idea of what's going on in the world. Don't look back, you bleeping idiots; something may be gaining on you!

sg:
right on the mark. Lock step news is what I call it.
VIN, click on the US and most Canadian TV and watch each station will have the same story almost in the same order at the same time. No twist or new angle just lock step. Papers are some right some middle some left but the stories base is the same. Even the stories on CD I have read and commented on elswhere sometimes 24 to 48 hours on an another web site. I find this web site copies way to many stories from other sites.

Mainstream media should be renamed "Corporate Liars Guild"

They have lost all sense of moral guidance. Its a shame that when we can no longer even get a glimpse of the truth, through television and the printed media, or democracy and Indeed our very way of life is in danger of going away.

George Bush and Dick Cheney are Criminal Traitors, and war Criminals at best. They have commited crimes that are much worse than that. Its time to start an full blow Special Investigation of their actions and those of the entire Justice Department. They have trashed our constitution, sent our soldiers to die for greed and oil based on a pack of fabricated lies. They personally participated in the planning of war crimes, and they are still in power. This is a crime against all humanity and the world, Its time to show America still has some morals other then the greedy corrupt corporations who live off the misery of others with their actions of war profiteering and enslavement of the middle class, its time for Justice and Now
Support Congressman Robert Wexler's Impeachment movement
wexlerwantshearings.com Sign his petition and do it now
we don't have a moment to loose.

"That giant sucking sound you hear is democracy wheezing."

Democracy has been on a respirator for decades. The wheezing sound is indicative of its soon-to-be death.

The problem is calling this 'journalism' in the first place.

True journalism is only practices by some individuals at independent organizations. I'd point to Robert Parry at Consortium News as an example. Or Amy Goodman at Democracy Now! as another example.

What the big corporate media outlets do stopped being journalism some time ago. Of course, that's why the newspapers are cutting jobs, because their management has abandoned the very things that people used to buy a newspaper to get ... ie, true journalism.

I'm old enough to remember when at all the major news organizations, from local papers to network news, there used to be a 'wall' between the buisness operations and the news operations. Ie, the news operations didn't care who the business people were selling ads to, they were going to go find the news and report the news. That 'wall' got demolished years ago, during the 80's would be my guess for most organizations.

So, we need a new word for what this is, because it sure ain't journalism. 'tabloidism', or 'propagandizing' or something else is what had a bad week this week. The handful of journalists still out there probably had a pretty good week. But, not many people noticed.

Tony Snow, notorious lying cultist, took a "job" with CNN today, which, apparently, pays way more than his $168,000/year White House Press Stroker job, which he left because he "ran out of money." What a f**king patriot!

Another bad week of journalism, and it's only Tuesday.

The bottom line: government, corporations and media have merged completely. Whining about Charlie or George is a waste of time, because the truth is, most of us would take the millions these actors-portraying-newspeople get and say and do what we're told without question.

What wouldn't you say or do for $1 million per year? Iran sucks! Cha-ching!!! Obama likes to have sex with male goats! Cha-ching!!! Cheney is a brilliant humanitarian! Cha-ching ching ching!!!!

Dems and Progressives continue to appear on FOX, CNN, et al, enabling the anti-American propaganda machines instead of standing up and refusing to support the liars. Then they bitch about the same P-machines on their websites and blogs, as if they aren't part of the problem. (Are you listening Huff?)

Apparently, "protesting" is now defined as whining a couple of times a week on some site visited by the choir. Mass quitings at the "networks?" Nope. Huge drops in NYT or Post sales? Nope. Refusing to work with known war mongers whose lies have helped kill and maim millions of innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan while said war mongers were busy cramming as many stolen billions into their pockets as would fit? Nope.

Guest appearance on Hannity? Ready when you are, Mr. Murdoch!!!

And enough with the PBS worship - they're on "the team" as well. Gwen Ifill has dinner parties with Condi-liar Rice for God's sake - how's that for objectivity?

Here's what I noticed years and years ago. Back when Bush Sr. was the pres.

The President will go give a major speech. He stands up and talks for at least 20 to 30 min, sometimes much longer at something like a State of the Union.

You'd turn on the news, and you'd see the exact same clips of that speech on every single channel.

That was one of the points where I started sceptical. If its independent editors making news judgments, then surely different editors occasionally make different judgments. I'd expect to change channels, and maybe some of the clips are the same, but some should be different. But no, you'd see exactly the same clips on every corporate American news broadcast.

Journalist have always polled very lowly with Americans. Usually down with insurance salesmen, used-car hustlers and politicians in terms of how trusted they are by Americans. This is not new, it goes back as far as I've been paying attention which would be the late-60's to early 70's.

That's to our advantage. There's a natural distrust that we should play on and encourage.

The comment above is interesting, because while Americans will tell pollsters that they don't trust journalist, the lies that are printed such as 'Saddam has ties to Al-Qaida' also show up as things believed by many Americans. There would seem to be a disconnect there.

I'd guess that it means that most Americans are well aware that the press can lie to them and be manipulative. But that most don't have enough time, energy, interest, etc to go find out the truth of what's going on ... so the lies that are broadcast are accepted even though the citizen at some levels knows not to trust the media.

You mauy not like their questions, but that is what most of America wants to know. Untill Senator Obama gives some real answers to these questions, he'll keep getting them.And if you are honest you'll say there has been mo answer so far.

And I hate to agree with Joe Scarborough (really hate to) but he's right. If you think these are hard questions, inconsequential or whatever other term you want to use. This is childs play. Nothing. Nada.

Note: This is a place we should attack at any available opportunity.

To me, much of the American system hinges on the ability of the media to convince at least some of the people some of the time that their lies are true. If we could build a much larger mistrust of the corporate media, that to me would be pulling a major pillar out from under the entire system.

For example, whenever a true left-winger or progressive is running for office and having some success, you can count on a major attack from the corporate media in the last days of the campaign. Wouldn't it be great if most voters were already so mistrustful of the corporate media that this had no effect? Or even better, if it had the opposite effect of what's intended because the electorate is so wise and educated that they know that if the corporate media is attacking a candidate its because that candidate would probably better represent them than the corporations. Ie, corporate media support should be the kiss of death for any campaign.

Too many people out here whine about the American people. Start doing something about it. Don't look for a magic bullet that changes everything overnight. Just start doing it one person at a time. Talk to a neighbor, talk to a family member, talk to a friend, and teach them how the corporate media manipulates their perceptions of events. If you find someone you know paying attention to corporate media news, talk to them and educate them. If enough people do that long enough, someday we win.

I see Hillary just logged on as 'Thomas More'

Every year I look forward to the publication of the Project Censored book on news that got the spike because it TOLD THE TRUTH.

ALL of these deliberately buried articles would be grounds for criminal charges. As would their suppression.

But because hey are suppressed, and the vast majority of the populace never hear of them... the show spins merrily on, the gears of modern corporate society grinding the people into a fine bloody pulp.

Democracy is not on it's last legs.

Democracy is not threatened.

Democracy is cold and dead in it's grave, and it's thin ghostly apparition is all that's left.

Here's a test. Stop and talk to a real American somewhere. Talk generally about politics and Obama. Don't bring it up yourself, but wait to see if they bring up the question of whether or not he wears a friggin label pin.

My guess is that most Americans are logical enough to not give a damn, and they won't bring it up. If someone does, my guess is that they are already a Hillary or McCain supporter and this is one of the talking points they've learned.

But, most Americans won't give a damn. They care about their jobs and their families. They care about how they are putting food on the table and paying the friggin mortgage now that the DC politicians (Dem and Rethug) have sent their job to China.

The MSM has been empowered by the corporations that own them to preserve and protect the status quo, not to initiate change of any kind. So it's no surprise that journalists who can think and write independently are sacked. They don't serve the corporate mission. The solution? Unplug or, better yet, sell or give away your TV. Get your news from the net and sites like this.

This big is better notion has got us into a lot of trouble. It's allowed too much power to accumulate in too few hands. Perhaps it's better to decentralize again, go back to smaller, rural communities where the power base was small and went no further than the local village or perhaps a few.

Big is not better! The bigger things become the more complex and top-heavy they are and the more insignificant we become as individuals.

Just a thought!

www.dangerouscreation.com

Pretty soon all our news will come from a Global Pravda type news agency that will have globalized all the news agencies and will be run by the UN.

Journalists are no longer required. The news is what Big Brother says it will be. Creative writers from Hollywood and psyops specialists will provide you your news. If you protest, the chip you will have implanted in your hand or forehead will be remotely switched to a "deny credit" mode, and prevent you from buying anything, and you will allow you to be tracked so that you can be picked up and "reeducated".

"2,400 full-time newspaper jobs were lost in 2007 — the largest annual drop in 30 years"

How many people does it take to photocopy GOP sliming-points?

Bozodriver: Right on! I've been telling everybody to get the DISH NETWORK for the past six years, mainly for FREE SPEECH TV and LINK TV. They are exceptional channels. Also, The DOCUMENTARY CHANNEL (197) has very good programming too.

David Grayling: I share your view but in reality, the task is a difficult one.

COMarc: Good points.

Eric Barth: I admire Ben. Good post.

Gail: You said something yesterday which impressed me, but I can't remember which article it was on.

The rest of you: Good points too.

Somehow, I feel we are on a merry-go-round going in circles on the same issues day after day. And the situation worsens, day after day. I think Oswald Spengler was right in the way civilizations collapse.

The LA Times has the story about McCains Disability Pension (58K pa tax free) and no one seems interested (yet). Will the parasite news outlets run with it? If not, why not?