HINESsight is a POS website, what are they?  Liberal haters or NEOCONS acting like liberal standard bearers?  It is quite obvious they don't get MSNBC or they're jealous.  Kiss my hiney hines hines!!

Oh, they are now quoting bloggers from the Kos...LMAO!!!

Mr. Russert was a one of a kind, I can't think of anybody in todays news that even comes close to his ability to be fair and balanced.  In the era of hate news with the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly I fear the divisiveness in the media will be forever a growing part of our culture.

A majority of Republicans are "admittedly" voting for Clinton during the 2008 Democratic Primaries and yet the Democratic Party continues to act like it is a legitimately close race between her and Barack Obama.  How many stupid people do you honestly think that there are in the United States of America that are actually buying all this crap?  Is it not OBVIOUS that the news media is playing a "shell game" with the people's emotions (and intelligence)?  Doesn't this look like a bait-and-switch operation to you?  Is it not obvious why Rupert Murdoch, owner of the Fox News Channel and The Wall Street Journal, has finally said ENOUGH OF THIS NONSENSE! and is putting his power behind Barack Obama now?

Wake up America, there is a naked emperor running around out there somewhere...

I guess I'll start by confessing I work for the news media, but in the financial end.  I didn't get my job because I know anything about the news business.  My duties don't have anything to do with getting the news out.  So I am a consumer of news no different from anyone else.

There is much hand-wringing now about the loss of advertising revenue and how to reverse it.  There are ongoing discussions at work now about how the company can reinvent itself to make the news content more "relevant".  So far, all the suggestions I've seen amount to dumbing down an already dumbed down product even further.

So my question for you is, who is asking for dumbed down news?  I tried a doing a little research on the internet in an effort to find studies that dumbed down news increased audience share and kept it over the long term.  I can't find anything.

For many Americans the information presented during Frontline's "Bush's War" must have come as a shock; perhaps some simply disbelieved what they were watching & hearing.  That is, if any of those people were watching.

For those relatively few Americans who have stayed highly informed about what has been happening in this country and Iraq since Sept. 11th, it was an excellent recap yet also contained new information. Unfortunately, only a small percentage of Americans will ever see this special, which can be viewed here: http://www.pbs.org/... .

But what struck me the most were the images presented. Here's what I saw during those two nights:

Eight American soldiers died in attacks in Iraq yesterday. This is what you would have read in the Washington Post this morning.

BAGHDAD, March 11 -- Eight U.S. soldiers died in separate attacks here and in the eastern province of Diyala on Monday, the deadliest day for U.S. troops in more than two months.

U.S. officials announced overnight that three U.S. soldiers were killed and another wounded when an improvised bomb exploded near their patrol in Diyala. An interpreter was also killed. No other details were provided.

In Baghdad, a suicide bomber killed five U.S. troops as they mingled casually with Iraqis in a shopping district. The soldiers had parked their Humvees and stepped out into the warm sun and swirl of people on the main thoroughfare of what was once Baghdad's most elegant neighborhood.

Barack Obama has already improved America in ways that will be seen for years to come.  He has not only brought back the very idea of having someone other than a white man or woman in a leadership role in our Federal government.  He’s been successful in pointing out to Americans that experience isn’t always the ‘answer’ to our problems, using a little common sense and good judgment helps too.  

Obama’s not only been successful in drawing out our younger generation to ‘get involved’, he’s been able to draw out some older folks that have been lagging in their citizenship duties as well.

ABC News and the folks at "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" have some ‘splaining to do.

Were you, like me, treated to an Abu Dhabi photo-op?  Abu Dhabi royals introducing George W Bush to the arts and sciences of falconry?

Where are the sharp-eyed falcons of the American media? Why was the irony of the moment not an issue.

Ronald Reagan, rather than admit an error, proceeded with a visit to a war cemetary in Bitburg, Germany that contained among others, the remains of some SS officers. However, our media caught on to the issue and made it a lead story for days. The very word Bitburg is GOP code for a media relations boo-boo.

And so why is falconry in Abu Dhabi a new Bitburg?

Perry Flippin worked at the San Angelo (Texas) Standard Times. The columnist was summoned to see the publisher last month and told his job was being eliminated. Adios Perry -- your last day is Jan. 4 -- thanks for the memories.

His final column leaves nothing unsaid about the state of the traditional media and its view of journalists as disposable commodities to be axed whenever the profit margin starts to creep below 20%. In other words, corporate publishers are right up there with the worst of the Greed Masters.

For 42 years, I have chased stories and looked under rocks and aspired to do good. My reporting aimed to help people be better citizens.

Times change.

They do indeed. Informing citizens does nothing to enhance revenue.

The Washington Post published my letter to the editor this morning: "Coverage Without Content," in response to Howard Kurtz's article on recent findings of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, "First the Good News, Hillary."

Howard Kurtz's Oct. 29 Style article, "First the Good News, Hillary," about a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, confirmed what many already know: Polls drive campaign coverage and vice versa. I appreciate project director Tom Rosenstiel's view that the findings indicate that the media's "horse-race lens" has little to do with the candidates' merits.

As reported earlier today by the Washington Post (and here on Daily Kos), at an October 23 FEMA press briefing on the California fires, deputy administrator Harvey Johnson took questions from 'reporters' who, in fact, were FEMA's own employees - public affairs officers, no less.  Word of the outrage has been slowly spreading across the Internet, typically sparking jeers and condemnation.

Now, FEMA has issued an apology - sort of. "Harvey Johnson, apologized for the error in judgment and promised to change procedures 'to ensure that all of our communications are straight forward and transparent,' " writes the Federal Times. However...

In response to additional questions about the incident by Federal Times, FEMA spokesman Aaron Walker said, "We issued the statement and that’s what we’re standing by. We won’t be doing additional interviews." (Federal Times)

In honor of the great Mel Brooks's "Spaceballs," I think it's time we honor the pundits, talking heads and bobblebots that take up time on all six cable and network news stations on a daily basis (Olbermann exempted), to ask this most important question.

Does cable news SUCK?  Or does it BLOW?

But before you vote, hear both options.

My day yesterday was not at all what I expected it was going to be.  The plan was for me to get up early, bring my son to his school so he could go to a math tournament on the north shore, then stop at a coffee shop and get some writing done.  In the afternoon, I was going back to his school to retrieve him and we were going to run a few errands, etc.  My 8th-grade band kid was then to perform at his school's football game yesterday evening at 7:30pm.  

All that changed because of Tropical Depression 10.

On an average day, half to two-thirds of any Big 3 Network's half-hour evening newscast will cover hard news. This will include stories sensationalized to play upon fears or prejudices or to provide false hope and other tabloid fare. The rest of the newscast will be devoted to soft news and features.

Such stories also air on 24-hour news channels, which is OK because they've so much time to fill. But nightly newscasts only have 23 minutes or less to cover the day's news. With air time this limited, newspeople need to weed out the tabloid and other sensational stories, and most of the soft news and features.

At this time in history, shouldn't each evening newscast, except the last segment, be devoted to relevant news?