HOWEVER, after questions are posed, it IS the media's job to follow up with more questions, noting inconsistencies and dodges, not just type up the answer dutifully without question.

A sad, pathetic display of why the media were caught up in getting us into this war...it was a foregone conclusion from the get-go, as we know, and no media hack like Gibson or Williams would stand in the way.

In praise of both articles. I happened to be watching the Today and I really did admire Katie Couric for her statements, perhaps someday soon we will see her in the right position for her talents. I then took a step back with Gibson, but couldn't remember hearing anything controversial coming from ABC at the time; I should have known better after watching debate #221!

Just when isn't it a "journalist's job" obviously Mr. Gibson feels that someone else gathers his news and all he does is read the teleprompter. Any serious journalist has the right to question that which they find lacking in information or not making complete sense with last week's news. That is why no one watches the networks at 6:30 pm. It's cable, PBS or the BBC for me and hope I have gleaned enough to form an opinion.

(. . . because it seems that nobody really cares, though I can see a too-terrible connection . . .), TV-star journalists, in large part, have also been in a long slow slide down in their competency in the English language. So what if it's a parallel slide? Journalism schools, of course, used to be part of, or closely connected to English Departments. These days, the instructors in the lesser journalism schools themselves are not really capable of monitoring the students' work for actual correctness. Charlie Gibson is only one of the moderately bad commentators in this regard. I'm surprised he doesn't pronounce 'nuclear' as 'nukuler.' He _does_ pronounce 'liberal' as 'librul.' I've heard him myself! He hacked up most of the old latinate church words; you know, common ones such as 'sacristan' when he covered Pope John Paul's funeral. Then they chose him as anchor on ABC, by default. Recently, I've heard ABC promote him as one of the nations most imminent journalists. Hard to watch!

When anyone talks about fear to debate,nothing is more obvious than the fear to debate the reason we are in this mess to begin with.Why can't any journalist from Amy Goodman and Bill Moyers on down discuss this issue.It is after all the central issue to this war.Anyone with a slightly open mind can see that there are some serious questions that need to be answered.

The difference between American MSM and Soviet era Pravda: The "reporters" at Pravda understood they were tools of the state.

They just happen to LOVE the smell of Vaseline.

NOW YOU KNOW, Glenn, WHY I NEVER WATCH THE MAJOR NETWORKS' MSM NEWS,

WHICH ARE SIMPLY PRO-ADMINISTRATION, SYCOPHANTIC, NAUSEATING UNBALANCED BIGOTED VIEWS!!!!!

THEY CLAIM TO PRESENT THE FACTS AND THE TRUTH,

WHICH COULDN'T BE FURTHER FROM "THE TRUTH AND FACTS," FORSOOTH!!!!!

PARDON ME WHILST I PROJECTILE VOMIT IN THEIR SAPPY FACES, BLEARGGGGGG!!!!! NOW THAT'S BETTER, AND A KOREAN SOAP TO WATCH I WILL INSTEAD CHOOSE!!!!!

Thank you so much for covering the travesty that has become mainstream corporate media. Without a doubt, it is one of, if not the largest of problems the American people face today, and just because they themselves are not going to cover it or mention it, much less admit to it, does not mean the issue should not be a major topic of discussion. For all the chatter about change needed in this country, virtually all of that change is potentially thwarted by major media which places corporate interests above the interest of the people. Until there is major media reform, FCC house cleaning, and until corporate execs no longer get to decide what is news and what is not, well then public opinion on nearly all other issues will remain influenced by their agenda. That agenda of course, does not hold getting out the facts, challenging authority, or the best interests of community as priorities.

Until that major overhaul occurs, we can expect an endless diet of fear, fluff, and blacking out of important stories. See you all in Minneapolis. Media reform now!

"Just an un-funny comedian. Nothing to see here. Move on."

I don't want to wade through 200+ comments to see if anyone else has mentioned this. But it's interesting that although Gibson says it's not his job to debate politicians, only to ask them questions, he got into an extensive debate with Obama about capital gains taxes. He repeatedly challenged Obama on whether or not it was a good idea to raise these taxes. Over and over again. He wouldn't let the issue go.

So I guess it's OK to debate policy issues when they involve your own personal finances, but not when they involve, you know, a potential war.

FYI...

Lots of folks here do turn what they learn here into action. But they don't always spend a lot of time talking about their activities online.

If you happen to check back here...

...count me as another one who was transported back to Sunday dinners with grandparents.

It wasn't only LW, though. We also watched the "Wonderful World of Disney," and "Flipper." [They lived in Florida.]

LW is still on PBS, at least where I live. Occasionally, we'll let it play, rather than changing the station. Apparently, he had a lot of really good musicians in his orchestra. It was a regular and steady job.

Which reminds me of the journalists being discussed. People who might have once had a lot of journalistic talent (we don't really know), but who decided that a regular and steady job (with a lot of great perks) was more important.

Does anyone else here remember Woodward and Bernstein? Isn't that what journalists should be aspiring to?

I guess that breed does still exist, but the major news outlets have let them all go. So perhaps I should reserve my disdain for the corporate heads instead of their televised lackeys.