Even If The News Media Said They Were Sorry...We Could Only Agree

Washington Post ombudsman, Deborah Howell wrote, "Readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys... show that they are right on both counts." Futher disclosure, by Ms. Howell, conveyed that over the past year the following discoveries were made: Obama-centered stories outweighed reports on John McCain 946 to 786; The Post featured more photos and front-page stories on Senator Obama; and running mates were not exempt from the imbalance. When readers voiced opinions about the two vice-presidential candidates being "scrutinized" unevenly Howell said, "They are right; it was a serious omission." Now, before we get all misty eyed let's let her words continue to flow. Some readers complain that coverage is too poll-driven. They're right, but it's not going to change. Well, she did her job as the ombudsman...a little too late. Please don't mistake her revelation reporting as an apology for the shoddy coverage. It most certainly isn't. How can the news people redeem themselves? They can't. The ones who have allowed themselves to become tainted are toxic and their credibility shot. Mel Baker wrote "Our “Freedom of Speech” becomes a useless exercise, if our fellow citizens have nowhere to turn for objective, contextual fact telling, so they can arrive at the truth of a matter on their own." Are we merely to say what's done is done? We can not. Hopefully, we will seek other (more reliable) sources in the future, withdraw our patronage from disreputable publications (along with television and radio news stations), and not be so blind the next time...if there is a next time.

Note: Sometimes a person or group can say, "I'm sorry." And sometimes all one can say in return is...you are so right.

May God bless America...and may America deserve it!

Zanne Booker 11-24-08