Newspapers No More??

"What's black and white and " red" all over?" That was one of my favorite riddles as a child. Of course, you know the answer---everybody "read" the newspaper back in the day. Not so much, now. More and more of us are getting our news off the internet and liking it more and more. It's immediate, free of that messy black ink, and---often less biased. Newpapers are losing readership at an alarming rate. Even old institutions, like the New York Times are suffering from lack of public interest- but maybe it's more than the internet that's causing the great migration away from the heretofore very powerful " fourth estate", otherwise known as the free press. The American media, originally one of the great bastions of a free people, symbolizing free speech and free thinking, has increasingly been accused of being the hand maidens of the left wing political agenda. Their credibility as an objective source of news reportage became very suspect during the last presidential campaign, when it seemed more than obvious that Obama was their chosen choice. It has been a known fact that most journalists lean toward the liberal philosophy, and should not be a surprise that their stories, editorials and general reporting reflect their bias-----but, we expect and deserve more from them. Their job, however difficult, is to investigate and present the information, without personal bias or intention of leading the public to make conclusions based on selected news they decide to print. It's a responsible and heavy burden to be the messengers of world events, political happenings, and stories of people in power that can and will shape our opinons of them and our voting tendencies, but it can be done and should at least be attempted. To spin and/or omit the news is to connive and control, and should not be tolerated.

A recent occurence, concerning the "Black Panthers", a group known for their extreme anti-white stance, is a case in point. This admittedly racially constructed group used tactics such as intimidation, weapons, and threats to steer people away from the 2008 polling boooths in Philadelphia . This incident has been under investigation and was brought before the United States Justice Department recently. And that's as far as it got----the case was abruptly and shockingly dropped . Eric Holder,the United States Attorney General, has refused to prosecute in this case. This, in of itself, is a most interesting and disturbing story. But just as interesting is the fact that the mainstream media has chosen to ignore the story completely. It simply has been absent from the papers---until last Sunday, when the Washington Post reprimanded itself for having committed the sin of omission , saying that it was unintentional, but nevertheless wrong. Yes, better late than never, but one has to wonder what they were thinking . Was it that it did not fit their well established habit and some would say, deliberate plan, to promote all things liberal, and ignore anything that might help the conservative movement? And now, comes another revelation that during the presidential campaign, a group of journalists were directed to "kill the Jeremiah Wright story", in order to not cast any negative aspersions toward their favored candidate, Barack Obama. This story can be found on You Tube.

If it is true that the media favors the current administration, there is no love lost between the administration and the Republicans. Barack Obama makes no apologies for his outspoken tirades against them and his contempt for any and all media that has the nerve to speak against his policies. He has gone so far as to refuse to be interviewed by Fox news and strongly encourages others in his circle to do the same and in fact has implored the public to boycott this station. His partisan attitude may show loyalty to his own left wing party members, but is strikingly unpresidential and off putting to a country more accustomed to their President at least trying to appear to be a leader for all of us, not just his own 'posse". At times his strident, aggressive words used to sell his own programs , such as the health care bill and the current bill to extend unemployment benefits, are so tilted and without whole truth, that he seems more like a tough ,bullying Chicago politician, than the President of a people who might respect him more without his resorting to name calling and put downs of those who disagree with him. Given the forceful nature of this President and the rapid, unprecedented changes unfolding before us under his direction, it would seem absolutely essential that we have access to a fair and balanced news media. The press has been called the "Fourth Estate" because it wields tremendous power in educating and influencing the country with the news it chooses to report or omit, and the way it chooses to slant it or not. Journalists should take this responsibilty very seriously, for what they do can turn the tides of history. We, as a people, should also remember to practice our own diligence and research beyond that found in the main media, most of whom will admit to a bias. There are, thankfully, other sources to give balance--- the internet news, blogs, radio programs, and magazines devoted to giving other sides of the news besides that which is fed to the masses through the newspapers. It will behoove us as a nation to do our homework, and not assume that everything one reads in print or hears on television is true, or that it is enough to simply read the headlines every day. It is not enough. Our very survival of a free nation may depend on our being a well informed ciitizenry, not just casual unlookers and followers of the powerful, the politicians, and the "Fourth Estate".

Beware of those who would boycott or possibly even attempt to shut down free speech, including such groups as the "Tea Party", and right or left wing talk shows, by ridiculing, intimidating, exaggerating or lying. Whether you disagree or agree with these groups is not the point---the point is that the first ammendment guarantees free speech for a reason. It assumes that an informed public will make informed choices. It did not assume that only the rich, influential, and powerful should decide for all of us. But we must have adequate and unbiased information from our newspapers and so called news magazines. They, unlike talk shows and some TV political programs which state up front their political views, should serve as a funnel of unpredudiced information, excepting for their editorials. If the newpapers are becoming a thing of the past, perhaps they have brought it upon themselves with their stubborn unwillingness to print both sides of the story fairly and to include all stories of interest, not just those they deem appropriate to their particular causes .

What's black and white and not very read anymore? You got it----a fading institution called the "newspaper"-----should they be referred to, instead, as our" opinionated papers"? Buh-bye, New York Times, Washington Post, etc. I'll miss some of you, as I still love to hold you in my hands, but you have betrayed your original trust and duty---to keep us informed, not indoctrinated.