Here is a timely set of articles that are being discussed behind the scenes mainly on blogs. This is a subject ADers will particularly understand. Note this is not being carried on the MSM… One is blasting Bush for his straw-man arguments in his speeches and the other is bringing to the surface the debate what is news and what is opinion. Are these pieces/debates good for democracy to be in the front pages? Or should the major media as I allege purposely keep these from the publics eye? And keep following Britney’s baby?


http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2006-03...tent_546901.htm

Bush using straw-man arguments in speeches
(AP)

BTW if the media was liberal we would see this photo of Bush plastered in the media all the time…



http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1002234267
AP's Bush 'Straw Man' Story: News Analysis Or Unlabeled Opinion?

By Joe Strupp


I found one paper of size posting it.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../w095252S08.DTL

1, is this subject to complicated for americans to understand or does the MSM just want the americans to remain ignorant. or?

2, Are these pieces/debates good for democracy to be in the front pages?

3, Is this journalism? or should it be opinion pages only?

1. No, it's not too hard to understand. No, MSM has no interest in keeping its readers ignorant. It's simply that this cannot be considered a "news" article in any sense. Political analysis, yes; editorial, yes; but not news.

2. I don't know if such things should be on the front page, but it's good for them to be in the news, clearly labeled as analysis or opinion.

3. I would call it opinion. As such, I think it would be a good editorial, and I would agree with it. But I can't support it as "news."

Yes, topics like this are certainly more "important" than celebrity news. (But people are interested in celebrities, and that isn't going to change.) So important, in fact, they must not be mislabeled for what they are not.

Victoria Silverwolf Ok I kind of disagree with your position on keeping readers uneducated. let me state it a different way. I believe the MSM does not care to educate the public, but just to make money the way the owners want.

do you think it may be it is easier to cover celebrities ie lower cost or are people more interested in it. No question the Star enquirer type papers make money, that is where the hero of the right and owner of more media in the USA made his money, that being FOX Murdoch. He brought his trash star journalism to the MSM in the US.

Is putting local crime front page day in and day out what readers want, or is again just low cost media and a way to make people more conservative?

should celebrity trash non-news even be on the front page? either. After all if it is just what the readers want it could be topless papers only.

I think it is not a 30 second sound bite type of news so to hard to discuss and make people think.

I do not know where journalism edges start and end. Is there a rule about a journalist putting in opinion in news?