Doug- Thanks! But I have to wonder how many “journalists” today are “doing the real work.” Having been around new professionals for many years, I can certainly say that the bulk of what passes for news these days is not original, researched, or unbiased. And accountability is not for the public but for the share holders. A sad turn of events that has compromised journalistic integrity.

My indignation has only just begun!

John- It’s called dumbing down to the lowest common denominator, and it is a self-perpetuating cycle. The dumber the news, the dumber the folks…(at least in an “informed citizen” point of view.)
Blogs may not have the inside sources, but they lack the necessity to make a profit for someone and instead are borne of passion and love of freedom. Passion may not always be right, but it is always persistant and in this day of secrecy, persistance is a definite virtue.

Thanks for speaking up.

Zack- Now that you’ve made your pitch, feel free to leave a relevant comment next time.

After the LA riots, America was close to race war.

In the ninties, angry white males were taking over everything.

After OJ, America had “lost faith” in its courts.

Iraq today is nothing but pointless suffering, and Americans are fighting in the streets over politics.

The truth is alwasy more subtle. This is why blogs are needed.

Only because I can’t resist: “Your righteous indignation has been noted now sit down!” (Robert Duvall in Network

Rudicus- Good to hear from you! And it’s true to a degree that we are all biased in some ways, but it that extra effort to dispense reasonable information with some attention to fact, reason, and relevance that differentiates quality journalism (or blogging, for that matter.)

Conservative bloggers that you allude to have taken their cue from the right wing propaganda machine, but so too do the organized liberal blogs. And though the method of multi-voiced single issue rants can be effective, they too often devolve into a pissing match or back patting festival. Indeed, I’m surely guilty of engaging in some of that myself in commenting here and there. The difference, to me at least, between the conservative and the liberal media is the vehemence with which they opine and the bias which with they report. A fourth estate, to be effective, must attempt to remain neutral at worst, and evenly balanced at best.

Certainly society has its share of the blame, but I almost think it’s a conditioned attitude in the younger generations, having learned their short attention spans from their most frequent babysitter and playmate, TV.

There will always be elements of things we won’t know about until those in charge have enough faith and trust in their populations to tell the unvarnished truth.

And I concur with your closing statement. It is, after all, what drives Common Sense.

Jet- I like the digital barber shop analogy. I’ve found that my writing also has openned my personal door to others in real life too, making me less hesitant to offer my views to others and get a dialogue going.
Thanks for the comment.

ShaeNC- Funny how an oft repeated fallacy becomes taken for truth. But society is full of many such things, and this is just another example.
As for the revolution bit, isn’t that what the right are trying to accomplish? A backwards revolution that will return us to the glory days of white, christian, male dominance?

The fourth estate is corrupt and becoming less relevant every day, simply because it has sold out its integrity. It’s only positive qualities come out when breaking news is on hand and people need quick info. In depth? Hardly ever…

Glad you dropped by.

Windspike- Soylant Green is people! (see ShaeNC’s second comment.)
Blogs don’t necessarily have to be all factual, at least not if they are upfront about it. The beauty of the blogger is that opinnion is often suggested by the nature of the medium. We offer links to stories, we check out facts and run down leads and call BS when necessary, but we also interject our own thoughts and ideas. That makes bloggers important, but not necessarily unbiased. But the MSM is supposed to be unbiased in its reports, factual in its information, and they’ve really dropped the ball there.

(But Soylant Green is pretty good with ketchup!)

Liam- Thanks for the great comment. I may have already addressed some of your main points in previous responses, and your point about too much noise is quite valid. But which came first…the apathy or the lack of quality information?

Because of the points you’ve made, a lack of time and/or resources to find the news, I usually avoid topical discussions and stick more to the “politosophical” issues, generating ideas and discussion on how to fix the big picture by making Common Sense changes. I am no more “hard news” than the Boys Life magazine, but I think I offer some rational thought and debate.

I agree with a federal shield law for journalists, but would go further to make sure that the journalists were actually taught and tested on the ethical responsibility of the Fourth Estate. And I would expect other information to corroborate the anonymous source information before I could blindly accept the initial anonymity or conclude it required a shield.

I also agree with returning media ownership rules. I’ve worked in the media industry for 15 years, both in the entertainment and news fields. I left the news arena because I could see through its shallowness. Entertainment is just as shallow, but it doesn’t pretend to be serious. Conglomerated media ownership serves no one but the corporations who run them, stifling lesser voices and deciding what is or isn’t important by the size of the type or the placement in the newscast.

I also support public programming options, and would further take back some of the air time from the profit networks and stations to be used for non-commercial, educational and political programming. The media operates on the publics airwaves, generating huge profits in doing so, and offers little more than mindless entertainment in return.

ShaeNC- A shot of soylant green each time someone says they are mad as hell?

GREAT piece! Unfortunately, I do not have the faith that some do in blogging as a replacement for the overall failings of our mass media outlets, because blogs have all of the same problems in microcosm.

People talk about the increase in information flow as a good thing, but the problem is that with that increase has come a huge increase in the noise-to-signal ratio. Sure, like Fox Mulder’s motto, “The Truth Is Out There”, but it’s out there amid hundreds of thousands of other, less truthful, less reliable voices.

Blogs have certainly increased the opportunity to find out what the populace is thinking, but that can’t take the place of a news media, people can not form valid opinions in a vacuum of fact, or you get what we have today, a situation where most people pick a political party like a favorite sports team and root for it to the exclusion of all else, taking their cues as to what is correct by what that party says and does.

The fact is that most bloggers (myself included) do not have the resources to actually gather the news ourselves, we can merely sift through what we find on the internet and other sources, attempt to correlate it until we have what we believe is a balanaced picture, and then opine endlessly about it.

Don’t get me wrong, I love blogging (although I’m sometimes dismayed that my political ramblings seem to be far more popular than my humor column, which is what I got into blogging to write), but I don’t think anyone should ever confuse my site with “hard news”.

So, what do we need to repair this problem?

1)We need a federal protection law for journalist’s sources. Whether you like leaks or not, they are a time honored way of getting news out to the public that those in power would rather sweep under the rug (from Watergate to Monica Lewinsky), and like the old dictum “t’were better that ten guilty men go free than that one innocent man be hanged”, it’s far better if ten top secret information leakers are not be caught to retain the chance that when there’s something going on that we SHOULD know about, someone will be willing to get that information out as well.
2)We need to return to the older, more restrictive laws on media ownership, or perhaps even more restrictive ones. I don’t recall the previous specifics, but due to the importance of a varied media voice, no media outlet should be allowed to own more than 10% of any media outlets in an area, more than one of the broadcast media types in an area (radio & tv), and no one media outlet conglomerate should be able to cover area totalling more than 15% of the populace. All of these designed not to harm corporate profits, but to ensure that one or two rich men sitting in a cigar bar somewhere can’t decide what version of reality the American public should hear.
3)We need a more robustly funded PBS system, and one made entirely free from political influence. Whether you like PBS or not, it should be like the Federal Judge of media outlets: Funded by the government, appointed by the government, but not subject to the temptations to slant their reportage for profit or ratings in much the same way a Judge is appointed but then free to make unpopular decisions because they are also free from reelection concerns.

I’m sure there are other things we should do as well. Another down side to the whole blogging arena is that most of us have day jobs and other real world concerns that sometimes force us to bring an argument to a halt before we may be done talking.

Either way, though, great piece, Ken, and certainly we’re better for its being out in the blog world.

Liam.

Anyway, blogs are refreshing. This doens’t relieve the MMPM from their responsiblity to conduct investigative journalism. I am very tired of people reporting (ala Jeff Gucker/Gannon – by the way, I am quite surprised no one has raised him in a comment thus far)”news,” but simply restate what the taking heads tell them.

Where are the hardball journalists? I suggest they are sitting behind keyboards, witnessing life as it happens and reporting it on their blogs.

Blog on Brother,

Oh, and P.S. I think the “mad as hell, and we are not going to take it anymore” is originally from the movie Soylant Green (http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue55/classic.html) – check it out some time, it is very twisted – and, perhaps some of the scenarios may actually be coming true.