Indeed it does.

I knew that there was a lot of journalistic fraud out there, but I hadn't realized the extent. And of course, one of the biggest frauds is Dan Rather.

Noble government has suffered so much at the hands of an unfair capitalist press. So sad, so sad. Why can we not be more like Russia? Just look at Putin's approval ratings.

Jim, no one is saying that the media should blindly lavish the government with praises, which is what you seem to be implying in your comment. All that is being asked is honesty, whether reporting positive or negative news.

That said, I don't expect even that much from the modern media. They are not in the news business anymore, they are in the advertising business. Print whatever brings in the eyeball, be it the truth or the latest fashionable lies. As long as the ad space keeps selling...

Meanwhile, the press is happily censoring *itself* when it comes to certain topics that don't agree with their political positions...

I don't expect even that much from the modern media.

It's not plausible that the free market is really that badly broken. Or that the government is more honest than the free market. But neither American Thinker nor this blog have been all that bothered by possible government dishonesty, only by the government getting picked on by the big bad media.

To which any real libertarian should say, yeah, right. Anyone who doesn't like the quality of the news has about a thousand choices for something better. You can always change the channel, change the station, change the subscription, or change to a different web site. That has been true for decades. But when the Pentagon and the White House are dishonest, the individual citizen cannot exchange them for something better. All that the voters have is a collective few votes every two or four years, which is not very much feedback.

Bill OReilly is oftentimes wildly dishonest.

It's never complained about by the Right