Time was newspapers and broadcast news were an important part of democracy in the USA. Those days are LONG gone. Too much has changed - if ever so slowly - for that to be true now. Newspapers and broadcast news have been reduced to profit-making concerns. Consumers of their products should keep that in mind.
Some of the things that have changed to make that true:
1. The Fairness Doctrine was done away with during the Reagan administration. This was a federal regulation that required all companies that used the public airways, to give both sides of the issue (or candidates) equal time. Doing away with this regulation made possible Fox News and the conservative monopoly on radio.
2. Commoditization of news by corporations, oddly enough also in the 1980's required that each newspaper or news broadcast make a profit. Prior to this, it was common practice (for broadcast news especially) to lose some money most years. It was considered the price a company paid to use the public airwaves. With profit making now the goal, news was dumbed down, ratings or circulation became more important leading to sensationalizing of the news, finding good-looking anchors became more important than good reporters. Eventually even the reporters became pretty faces who read the news as increasingly the news producer did more and more of the actual reporting.
3. Twenty-Four hours cable news started in the 1980's and becomes embedded in American culture by the 1990's. It all started with CNN of course, but eventually led to MSNBC and Fox. Unfortunately there's not enough actual news to fill one 24 hour news channel, let alone 3 of them. That led to focusing even more on stories that can be sensationalized (Scott & Lacey Peterson anyone?) and the genesis of the "pundit". If it that reads like a curse word, then you're paying attention. These creatures (I can't manage to call them people) make an enormous amount of money by telling news anchors their opinions about news stories - often politics. Actual qualifications aren't required to be a pundit, just HAVE an opinion. Having 2 pundits with opposing opinions is supposed to be good television and is what passes for trying to follow the Fairness Doctrine nowadays.
4. Also during the Reagan era, the federal law that restricted how many news outlets one company could own in one market was done away with. This law was intended to prevent one company owning all the TV stations, newspapers and radio stations in one market. Over a series of years that was changed. So now there's only one newspaper in most major cities (though, to be fair, this isn't the only reason). And there are many cities where one company owns the newspaper, a major radio and a major TV station. Clear Channel anyone? This has led to fewer voices with more power in fewer news outlets.
All of this is just to say that no one should assume that any journalist is solely devoted to the truth. They're not out to lie, but they are only concerned with reporting that PORTION of the truth that will get you to buy their newspaper or tune in to their news report. The news consumer, if you have any concern about getting the full story, must take the time to find it out for yourself. Sure, continue with the MSM if you like, but remember their bias. And don't forget about the internet. There are great blogs out there - with their own biases that they're very upfront about - and Google and Digg and too many other places to mention.
This is an election year, something to take very seriously. Don't let anyone bamboozle you into making a decision about any candidate - politicians have become adept at using the media (more on that soon). If you hear something interesting about a candidate, verify for yourself on the internet that it's true. Take responsibility for your own news, because nowadays, if you don't no one else will.
