If we ever get a free press back, will we be able to trust them?

[Bunny]

With the latest Newsweek thing, I was wondering when the American press will finally say ENOUGH and start telling the truth about what's going on.

But if they start to tell the truth, can we trust and/or respect them? We already know how low they can go. Who can say that it won't happen again?

I probably wouldn't respect them, and I certainly wouldn't trust them, that's for sure. But at this point I guess I won't look a gift horse in the mouth.

[Solly Mack]

1. Like any breach of trust, it would take time to build it back up

but if they're willing to go back to actual reporting, I'll meet them half way....ever so cautiously :)

[Bunny]

10. You're more generous than I am.

[Solly Mack]

15. trust but verify ...the only thing Reagan ever said that made sense

gawds...I'm going soft in my middle age.

[Bunny]

16. Heh. We may have to send you back to boot camp!

Toughen you up a bit!

[Bouncy Ball]

2. I will judge that by their actions.

If I see that they are really holding the government's feet to the fire and ACTING like an independent, free press, I'll believe it. And that goes no matter WHO is in office.

But I won't hold my breath waiting for this to happen. Not as long as big businesses own the media and big businesses are in bed with elected officials, having a nice cozy little shack-up affair.

[Bunny]

9. It's a profitable affair for everyone isn't it?

Everyone except us, of course.

[Shoeempress]

3. Do you mean like in the "good old days" when all they could talk about

was Monica. Will I ever trust them again, NO.

[Bunny]

7. It all started with Limbaugh, didn't it?

I know that's an oversimplification, but he sure proved that there was money to be made in whoredom, didn't he?

[dbonds]

11. I think the groundwork was set with the formation of CNN.

At least as far as news for profit goes. I think they did real news at first though.

[Bunny]

14. Yeah, CNN did start with real news.

That was when Ted Turner was still in charge.

[dbonds]

4. Maybe we will always need checks and balances in the press.

The blogs are a start. But there needs to be some legistalation to take the profit motive from the press. Otherwise they will always be open to corruption. It is as if we need a real 4th branch of the government, whose job it is to report and investigate.

[Bunny]

12. The blogs are a good start, for sure.

I'm not sure about legislation to curb the profit motive, though. I'd be happy to see the return of the Fairness Doctrine.

[politicaholic]

5. The press seems to like their current position and will for years...

You see, their "integrity" only seems to crop up when there's a democrat in office. They blast them, change public opinion, and all of a sudden a republican is elected and the gag is reinserted.

They will never learn.

[Bunny]

6. There's no real incentive for them to learn, is there?

The corporate money is more than enough to compensate their lack of ethics.

[cornermouse]

8. Since I suspect they won't be able to relocate their so-called integrity

(the kind they showed when Clinton was president) until another democrat is in the White House, probably not.

[Bunny]

13. Sigh.

I fear you are correct.

[Protagoras]

17. Trust but verify.

We should never blindly trust holders of public responsibility. Newspapers, radio, TV have all...from the beginning...been used to shape public opinion as much if not more than they ever informed.

Go back and watch Citizen Kane...or Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Notice how the corrupt immediately use the papers for their purpose? This is nothing new...it's been around since the start. It's just more overt now.

If they ever come back to anything approaching actual fairness or balance...then we should be happy....we should be engaged...but we should forever be wary. I say the same of all government officials. That doesn't mean I'm eternally cyncal...just careful and realistic about the tendencies of anyone who sits in a postion of power.

[Selatius]

18. You'll never get the press back. It's all corporate owned.

"Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one." - A. J. Liebling

You might want to look into "socializing" the news networks or setting up a news network owned and operated by ordinary people for ordinary people. Basically, I'm advocating a news network run along democratic socialist principles, community owned news outlets.

It's radical, but ultimately, if people themselves are not responsible for searching out the information in this world, they will leave themselves vulnerable to manipulation by certain interests who may wish to distort the information to their advantage.

[pretzel4gore]

19. i hate to do this, but knowlege is power! ... :(

the 'press' abetted the bush coup in the 2000 election, by relentlessly pushing the anti democratic party message for years...they thought they therefore had bush under control, but the 911 disaster sorta screwed them, in effect linking their fate to the fate of the bush criminals...that was the situation on sept 12th/01 but as everyone can see, things have gone downhill since then.
the dan rather/cbs story, and now the newsweek story have 2 distinct results: they make it seem the media is in contention with bush, thus giving them legitimacy, and at the same time subjecting the already subjugated media to more bushevik pressure to obey, a 'have cake and eat it too' sorta situation for the nazipoos...
please do not believe what the mediawhores want you to believe; newsweek is and always was a mediawhore