<DIV>Aww....c'mon, don't get you knickers in a knot, Mr. Sine qua non! <A href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001" target=_blank><IMG alt=Goofy src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_200.gif" border=0></A> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>First, nope, no trouble reading at all. I read the following directly from your mail:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"Recently, former Clinton administration National Security advisor Sandy Berger was being lambasted in the media, accused of what amounted to theft of sensitive documents. His name was being dragged through the mud all over the media, no doubt about it."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I simply chose to respond to the commentary implicit in the mud-dragging portion of your post. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Berger cleared of any wrongdoing? The example of media misdeeds in your first post seems questionable. </DIV>
<DIV>The spokeswoman for the National Archives has denied this. She said that the facts had been misreported by both ABC Radio AND by the WSJ. </DIV>
<DIV>There seems to be quite a bit of confusion on what is actually going on with this investigation. Perhaps the rest of the media simply waiting for the Berger to actually be cleared of wrongdoing before they report that he has been cleared of wrongdoing. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for Rice being given a pass for actions based on intelligence failures--I'm sure she has been. Just as the rest of the Bush admin have for the most part. </DIV>
<DIV>And the majorities of both houses of Congress from both parties who, like Billy/Hilly, advocated regime change in Iraq before Bush even came to power and then voted for the war based on this same intelligence which was shared with them. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for the profit motive thing--I finally got to your CENTRAL POINT-- this is hardly anything new is it? Since papers have been sold and distributed it's been the sensational that sells. And things haven't changed since the 1800's. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But you're way our of touch if you think that the Sandy Berger story is anything hot for making ratings. His guilt or innocence is a poor example for illustrating your point. </DIV>
<DIV>The vast majority of infotainment consumers have no clue about some grey suited ivy league something or other in DC. </DIV>
<DIV>Nor do they care who or what he is or was.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Try the hours and hours of coverage devoted to the lurid details of Scott Peterson's murder trial, Kobe Bryant's pre-trial proceedings, or the Hocking case in SLC instead. People just loooovve this stuff. And it makes lots of money. <BR></DIV>
<DIV>I guess the problem is what to do about it? Anyone who has ever listened to NPR knows that government media is no answer for impartiality. </DIV>
<DIV>I'd opt for full enforcement of anti-trust/monopoly laws to break up big media concentrated ownership of the public airwaves. Some good old-fashioned trustbusting might work wonders. </DIV>
<DIV> TL<BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>Tbertruss@aol.com</I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"><BR>Tim L. et. al.<BR><BR>I guess you have trouble reading. <BR><BR>I said that Berger was cleared of wrong doing, yet there was little attention paid to this in the media. And that scandals sell news, yet being cleared of guilt does not, relatively speaking, or so it would appear from the way these sorts of events are given coverage. <BR><BR>I am not necessarily questioning the attention Berger's alleged wrong doing received, but certainly I am questioning the lack of attention paid in the media when he is cleared. Like many of these political incidents, there is partisan political pressure to hype or not hype events depending on the context.<BR><BR>Do I think Condi Rice would have been given a pass for inadvertently taking documents? Maybe, maybe not, depending. Would the media have ignored her being cleared of wrong doing? This is my point.<BR><BR>Condi Rice has been given!
a pass
to some extent for lying to the American people about the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And for someone of her intelligence and education, it is hard for her to claim, as Bush does, that she was "misinformed" due to an "intelligence failure."<BR><BR>But my point is not primarily partisan.<BR>My comment on the Fourth Estate cuts every which way in terms of the integrity, honesty, fairness and relevance of news reporting on every aspect of our world.<BR><BR>Here is my main point again in case you'd like to address it:<BR><BR>The profit motive when allowed to dominate as the sine qua non of the Fourth Estate is destroying democracy.<BR><BR>Ted Moffett<BR><BR>_____________________________________________________<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR>http://www.fsr.net <BR>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><A
href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb046" target=_blank><IMG src="http://www.smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb046" border=0></A></BLOCKQUOTE><p>
<hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/100/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail/static/efficiency.html">New and Improved Yahoo! Mail</a> - 100MB free storage!