Has the press become sentient?

[jingofever]

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/29/AR2006062902086_pf.html">www.washingtonpost.com/wp...86_pf.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Condoleeza Rice and Sergei Lavrov (Russian Foreign Minister) had a meeting about Iraq. It was described as frictionless by a party hack but was "accidently" taped (scare quotes because you can never be sure when you are being manipulated). The sentient part:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The State Department's subsequent denial of tensions illustrates how officials manage the information that flows to the public from such closed-door meetings to create an image meant to advance foreign policy objectives. Reporters often have no independent account of such discussions.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Will we see more scepticism by the media? Or will they take the easy way out and merely transcribe the pronouncements of our leaders? OK, stupid question, the press are hacks. But it is interesting to see this admission that our government routinely lies and that the press does nothing about it. Maybe we just need Glenn Kessler to write more articles. <p></p><i></i>

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

No, more of the public has.<br><br>The state-controlled press are doing Punch and Judy theater in an attempt to sustain the myth of watchdog journalism.<br><br>That's why the NYTimes and the White House are pretending to be hostile.<br><br>This is more of the same. <p></p><i></i>

[bvonahsen]

I think Hugh is right here. The public is becomming more and more aware of how government conducts business. As a consequence, people are getting their information from the internet which is less controlled and monipulated than traditional media. As a result fewer people are reading newspapers or watching TV and cable.<br><br>Since people are voting with their feet and pocketbooks the press has actually noticed. So the press has gotten a little tougher, not much, but it's a start. The powers taht be have also noticed and were behind the push to regulate the internet. The net neutrality movment has so far successfully rebuffed this, but I doubt they'll go away. Powerfull forces want to control and regulate the internet. We can't give up.<br><br>Fox's Neilson rateings are down. If they go down far enough and the current war against the New York Times doesn't work then I would expect that Murdoc will have to make big changes. Hopefully for the better. <p></p><i></i>

[heyjt]

Bush Attack on New York Times Could Have 'Chilling Influence,' Overseas Press Club Warns<br>Thursday June 29, 5:57 pm ET <br><br><br>NEW YORK, June 29 /PRNewswire/ -- Defending The New York Times's recent disclosures of secret government programs to monitor Americans' overseas phone calls and financial transactions, the Overseas Press Club of America today told President George Bush that his administration's attacks on The Times could have a "chilling influence" on editors around the country.<br>ADVERTISEMENT<br> <br> <br>OPC President Richard B. Stolley wrote the President that Vice President Dick Cheney singled out The Times "in particular," even though both the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times had also broken the most recent story on the government's surveillance of financial dealings in search of terrorist trails.<br><br>"None of these newspapers need help from our organization," Stolley wrote. "But we are deeply concerned that other editors, who have less prestige, less influence, and less supportive and well-financed publishers, may feel the chilling influence of your words and hesitate to publish controversial stories for fear of being called unpatriotic. This would be a serious blow to press freedom and to the long-range good of the country."<br><br>Stolley said it is "by no means an open case" that the two secret programs were legal, and added that "it is hard to believe that the terrorists did not suspect that their activities were being monitored." President Bush and other top officials, he noted, have repeatedly warned that they were tracking terrorists' financial transactions.<br><br>The OPC president said the need to withhold news that might hinder U.S. military efforts "must be weighed against the damage to our society and its institutions that can be done by secret, unfettered spying on our citizens."<br><br><br><br><br>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Source: Larry Martz, Freedom of the Press Committee <p></p><i></i>

[heyjt]

How about this one? <br>Is this arrogant, or is he indicating he knows the attack is coming?<br>What a shithead.<br><br>George W. Bush, following the briefing at his Crawford, Texas, homestead on Aug. 6, 2001, about a CIA memo titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Upon listening to the CIA briefer, Bush says, "All right, you've covered your ass, now." Bush proceeds to go fishing… (From Ron Suskind, here.)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/">www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> Scroll Down <p></p><i></i>