Glenn Greenwald has presented one of the BEST views of EXACTLY WHAT IS WRONG with news coverage in the U.S.A. Jeremy Paxman of the BBC should be REQUIRED VIEWING and STUDY for American reporters on HOW TO CONDUCT A PROBING, RELENTLESS, POLITE YET UNYIELDING ENQUIRY INTO THE OBFUSCATION AND PREVARICATION OF THE SO-CALLED "POWERFUL"! Tim Russert is like LITTLE MISS MUFFET compared to Paxman! THIS IS PRECISELY WHY I NEVER WATCH AMERICAN NEWS, BECAUSE LIKE THAT BUFFOON Tucker Carlson, THE MEALY-MOUTHED CREEPS Richard Wolffe and David Gregory, THE OBSEQUIOUS TOADIES OF Bushland Uber Allies LIKE David Broder, George Will, Victor Davis Hanson, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, John Fund, Jonah Goldberg, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, Bill O'LIE-lly, Rush RIMBugger, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Joe Klein, THESE SO-CALLED "journalists" AND "commentators" NEVER, NEVER, NEVER PROBE THE SECRETIVE DIRTY LITTLE INSIDIOUS MACHINATIONS OF Bushland Uber Allies, BECAUSE THEIR ARE AIDERS AND ABETTERS OF THE CRIMINAL Bush REGIME!!!!! I WOULD LIKE TO SEE Bush, Cheney, ANY HIGH Bushland Uber Allies DARE TO FACE Jeremy Paxman's RELENTLESS QUESTIONS! THEY WON'T BECAUSE THEY KNOW HE WON'T LET UP, HE WON'T GIVE THEM A BREAK OR GO EASY ON THEM, WHICH IS EXACTLY AS IT SHOULD BE!!!!! THAT Bush SEGMENT WITH THE Irish LADY REPORTER SHOWED HOW Bush CAN'T HANDLE EVEN RELATIVELY PROBING AND VERY POLITE QUESTIONING, ALWAYS HAVING TO SAY "Let me finish" BECAUSE HIS RETARDED CHIMPANZEE PEA-BRAIN WONT ALLOW HIM TO THINK FAST ENOUGH TO COVER UP THE STREAM OF LIES EMENATING FROM HIS TWISTED MAW!!!!! HAH!!!!!

I noticed in several of the posts here that "off-the-record" was -- in the "olden days" -- used in very rare situations and only after laying out possible consequences of both positions. I'm one of the older journalists who learned never to use "off the record" and never to agree to an off-the-record interview or comment. If it became an issue as a story developed, then it was "discussed" with higher-ups and decisions were made on an as-needed basis. There was no such thing as blanket "off-the-record."

I have a friend who left a dream job in journalism, because he couldn't stand what his profession had become. Instead of uncovering and investigating stories, he told me that journalists on the political beat spent their time waiting for the phone to ring from sources with information to leak. Reporters don't report any more, they've become courtiers fearful of losing access to the powerful or invitations to Embassy Row dinners.

(With exceptions - like here at Salon)

Fair and balanced, comprehensive, in-depth - often seem like ghost phrases - standards of the past.

Now we have hyped-up, sensationalized, otherwise informationally vacant and challenged reporting...

Infoentertainment...

LjWalker53, I have missed your well-thought posts. It's a shame AkaSmith left - I've been ganged up on here - don't let the 'haters' get to you - they're the biggest hope, change, and unity, hypocrites out there right now.

Just have some laughs and let go...

*Cheers! And best to you...!*

And even though you're currently being hypocrites, I am being hopeful and wishing you all the best !

*Peace, hope, change, unity*

*Walk your talk? How about even talking your talk?*

I have realized of late that there is a danger I was not aware of before - the danger of Frat boys in the media influencing our politics too much.

Now I am sure that there are intelligent Frat boys too...

But I am currently aware of a number of Frat boys in the TV media who really still have that Frat boy mentality.

George Bush is one example of Frat boy mentality.

Of course, like I said - variety exists, even among Frat boys,

but...

We need our most intelligent, and we need higher standards of excellence and comprehensiveness in journalism and reporting.

It's important to the quality of our culture, society, and democracy.

Yeah, piss on all of 'em. They lost their journalistic honor and self-respect when they sold out to the political establishment. Instead of fearlessly and vigorously digging up information and publishing it, the press today sucks the asses of the people they "cover."

Of course, this is especially true of the biggest names in journalism--the "pundits," the TV loudmouths, and the like. Self-styled founts of wisdom like George F. Will, David

("Voice of the People") Broder, Tim Russert, Brit Hume et al. are more concerned about getting invited to those exclusive Georgetown cocktail parties than they are about doing honest reporting. And not getting invited to the White House--well, that's a fate worse than death to these people!

Somebody, in a fit of pique, called someone else a relatively meaningless name and, apparently, instantly regretted it; the horror, the horror. Yes, clearly this is a revelatory and substantive issue that cuts to the heart of the campaign. By all means, it deserves to overshadow issues that matter -- such as Obama's actual intentions on NAFTA, for example.

And maureenodonnell: in terms of language, yes, the source really does need to be taken into consideration; context matters, especially when one is to divine the inner thoughts of a person from their language. Words in one place may not mean precisely the same in another; the context and the speaker's intent must be taken into account.

Very interesting stuff. But apparently this cozy relationship between journalist and politico has only been going on, according to you, for the past 8 yrs..Oh how pitiful you are to think Bush is to blame for all the worlds woes. How it clouds your mind and warps your sense of reality.

I'll just point out that during the entire Clinton impeachment imbroglio, Newt Gingrich was having a quite open adulterous affair with Callista Bisek, an aide much younger than himself.

The press knew all about Newt's behavior, he made little to no effort to hide it.

Did you hear of Newt's adulterous affair during the Clinton impeachment?

One high government official has an affair and it is an immense (one could even say Elephantine) news story, another high government official, one who is in a position of prosecuting the first official, has an affair and it is not spoken of at all by the press.

If you can't see the problem with that (not to mention the glaringly obvious bias) then perhaps you should seek a cornea transplant.