|
I'm with you on this one Shinerbock.
It's not that I think individual journalists are particularly corrupt or self serving, but I think we've had too many cases in which journalists went with a story that they wanted or expected to play a certain way because of their general world-view, even though that the actual facts might not have supported the conclusion that the journalist reached. And the rest of the mainstream media didn't seem to want to call them on it as much as maybe the general public and the blogs did. (Dan Rather and the forged Bush service documents is the most obvious case, but the huge discrepancies in Iraq coverage depending on who is reporting are also an issue; as well as the Plame story too.)
I think journalists may be very well intentioned, but that ultimately we can't depend on the press to be anymore unbiased than anybody else, despite what journalism ethics professors teach.
And when people defend the idea that we should trust the press to know should is part of the story or not, it's insulting. Those days are over. If they weren't over before Rathergate, they are over now.
|