Meanwhile, the online survey documented the shift away from traditional sources of news, such as newspapers and TV, to the Internet - most dramatically among so-called digital natives - people under 30 years old.
Guffaw. Who thought of that? Idiot.
I stopped engaging with traditional media in 2005, so it's near enough to remember why. I always used to read the paper my father brought, probably from a reasonably young age. In 2004, the paper changed owners (guess which paper?) and I noticed a whole load of columnists change, and the general opinion take a new tack. It didn't take too long to work out that a good chunk of any news outlet's work was just the hashed and rehashed agenda of the owners: so new owners, new agenda.
I figured that as long as I knew that, I could still read a paper or watch television, just with a more critical eye. At least they still gave me the news, didn't they? But not long after I discovered what companies like Reuters and AP do. I was quite angry that all most newspapers do is resell you the work of somebody else, and then indoctrinate you to their ideology/agenda.
I suppose that's not news to most people around here, and I dare say that some of you knew it 40+ years ago. But still, that's why this 18-30 would rather read the internet: at least they don't ask for your money.
PS: I read Bernstein's and Woodward's book the other day, and wondered if anybody did stuff like that anymore. Probably not. Member of the Anti-Fabulousness League since 1987.
Eric Lichtblau of the NY Times broke the story over the warrantless wiretapping (he has a new book out about this).
The Times also uncovered the recent story about the pentagon feeding propaganda to military "experts" who then acted as shills on TV. Their conflict of interest was never revealed (most have business relationships with military contractors).
On the web I only know of one site seriously involved in digging out such stories: TalkingPointsMemo.com and their spinoff TPMmuckraker.
It's TV and radio that have abdicated their roles as investigative reporters. A combination of business interests (such as military contractor GE owning NBC) and the need to stay on the good side of government so that their broadcast licenses and tax breaks are not endangered keeps them from doing real "journalism".
For all the talk about the internet, the bulk of it still consists of people citing work done by the traditional media. Where did the story at the top of this thread come from - a press release. Policies not Politics ---- Daily Landscape
A little bit of muckraking may still be done (in the New York Times), but its results are now being buried instead of pressed to their logical conclusions, as in former times when the media were still healthy and functioning watchdogs. It's no wonder that Americans are disgusted with the mainstream media and deserting the MSM in droves, and the mainstream media have no one to blame for it except themselves.
