Why The Media Sucks
Imagine this. Imagine that President Bush buys a whip, and, on the White House lawn, starts flaying violently several innocent people, who came for the White House tour.
Would the media cover it?
Would there be a headline on the front page of the newspaper? You might say, stop being silly, Adam, of course the media would report on it. Of course it would be huge news.
But the truth is, there's an amazing amount of stories just as shocking as that hypothetical one. And they're not being picked up in the national media nearly as much as the Terri Schiavos, Runaway Brides, and Pop Star Pedophiles are.
Did you know there's an American businessman, held hostage by insurgents in Iraq at this very moment??
Media Silent, Locals Perplexed
Other countries, like Italy, for example, actually care that their citizens are being held hostage by terrorists. When one of their reporters showed up hostage in a terrorist video, it became a national story, so much so that the government "arranged" (paid) for her release, and sent in agents to rescue her. (Our soldiers shot one of those agents, and her, while they were on their way to the airport, by the way.)
But of course, to actually report on an American being held hostage would be "unpatriotic," the same as would be reporting on Haliburton's sweetheart government contracts (and missing taxpayer money to the tune of 800 million), the Bush administration's reduction (by 1.2 billion) of a penalty levied against the Tobacco industry, and how the Bush squad recently got rid of language in a GLOBAL WARMING PROTOCOL that stated GLOBAL WARMING WAS A PROBLEM. Yes, report any of these things to the level that Michael Jackson was reported, and you're against America, my friends.
So the media is content with back page stories on front page hypocrisy, incompetence, disaster and deception.
At least until the Tom and Katie breakup.