It’s safe to say that traditional news outlets are no longer trusthworthy providers of hard news. When they spend time announcing the Pitt-Jolie kid’s birth, something important is being left out of the newscast. Interesting that untraditional sources like the Daily Show (and, to a lesser but more disturbing extent, the Onion) are now the ones asking the questions too tough for the news media. Rolling Stone has a longer history of political commentary, but it seems to have irised in on its political activist side since the 2000 election. Here, a piece by JFK Jr. effectively questions the 2004 election results that so perplexed everyone in the world except the yahoo Bush voters. Think of what this story could become if the watchdog could be bothered to bare its teeth.

But that same month, when exit polls revealed disturbing disparities in the U.S. election, the six media organizations that had commissioned the survey treated its very existence as an embarrassment. Instead of treating the discrepancies as a story meriting investigation, the networks scrubbed the offending results from their Web sites and substituted them with ”corrected” numbers that had been weighted, retroactively, to match the official vote count. Rather than finding fault with the election results, the mainstream media preferred to dismiss the polls as flawed.

This entry was posted in Political Science and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>