I don't watch much television news. These days it deems reporting every bit of minutia concerning the death of Michael Jackson more important than a US Congress women taken hostage by a foreign nation.
Newspapers are struggling these days, and why not? They are as about as useful as a Republican politician lecturing to us about morals.How trustworthy can a paper that offers access to Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and even the paper’s own reporters and editors for a token fee of $25,000?
Even worse is when the very same paper publishes an opinion piece by neocon tool John Bolton advocating an Israeli strike against Iran. The reasons are both spurious and complete fabrications, starting with Iran's non-existent nuclear weapons program, and continuing on with the disputed election results from last month's elections. Never mind that such an action would be illegal under international law, Bolton (and Israel) have no use for international law, except when it serves their purpose.
As for that whole "democracy" thing, when Hamas won the majority of seats in the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council, the US, (as part of the Quartet on the Middle East) voted to cut funding to the PLC. There you go, that's what you fucking get for exercising freedom of choice.
So if the newspapers are struggling, maybe they should focus less on Michael Jackson (that's why we have supermarket tabloids) and focus less on propaganda for that next big war. However, online newspapers do provide good links for bloggers, and I will continue to link to them even if some crazy judge thinks the practice should be banned to save newspapers.