Monday, April 21, 2003
No news at 11
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
But if they do it themselves, more power to them.
A King County newspaper published a fake story to assist the police to catch a jailed convict in an arson plot. Placing information about wanted criminals is one thing, creating a fake story is another. News is supposed to be just that, news-based in fact and grounded in reality-not a tool for the police.
CNN reveals the "news" they kept to themselves, censoring themselves in the name of "safety." What else have they kept to themselves?
Imbedded journalists reporting government approved sound bites and no one says boo. While not giving out exact locations of troops is fairly reasonable, what else wound up on the cutting room floor?
We already have the president treating the constitution like a White House intern. And Bush v2.0 has no problem using fake information to suit his own needs, do we really need the news media following his example?
What if the news chose not to cover Rodney King? Or Amadou Diallo? What would the country be like today if Woodward & Bernstein kept Watergate to themselves?
Instead of covering the latest bills designed to rape our schools, curb our freedoms, and feed the fat cats wallets, why not fill the "news" with some fluffy stories about firemen getting cats out of trees, or a neat-o story on the next wave of products destined to make our lives easier? It doesn't have to be true, nothing else seems to be anymore. Truth just gets in the way of the status quo, and we certainly don't want that.
"There ought to be limits to freedom."-George W. Bush
|
