| the general media trend, which has begun to steer to the left. Basically, the mass media within the US is reflecting the counter-culture, not the culture itself, and is one of the elements that is dividing us as a nation. |
hmmmm. sometime between the age of 8 and 10, i first discovered there was more to a newspaper than just comic strips and also began developing a jones requiring at least a 30-minute fix of nightly network news every 24 hours. from then til now, i've paged my way thru a sizeable stand of trees (tall ones too) and spent at least the equivalent of an entire year (possibly more) basking in the phosoporic glow while huntley, brinkley, chancellor, mcgee, brokaw, wallace, murrow, cronkite, rather, daly, jennings, young, robinson, reynolds, smith, reasoner, koppel and scores of locals including jerry dunphy...even don henley's bubble-headed bleached blonde who used to come on at five and tell us about the plane crash with a gleam in her eye*...let me know what was happenin out in the big wide world.
for the past 4-5 years, the myth of the liberal media has rung pretty hollow in my opinion. so far, 21st century journalism has had more in common with the late 1950s/early 60s than the 90s. murdoch's empire has taken up where the hearst and tribune syndicates left off.
while it's always possible i'm experiencing an episode of early-onset senility and i'm totally delusional, consider this: is it at all possible a bush presidency woulda emerged virtually unscathed as it did in 2004 back in, say, 1974? hell, sam donaldson--on his own--coulda demolished the boy withlout breaking a sweat.
one more thing needs considering. if the left is the counter culture, that means the right is the culture. nothing is more unseemly than a majority whining loudly about how how the counterculture media is really the mainstream media.
*the inimitable christine lund herself.
