The one consistent flaw in GG's generally excellent media criticism is his under-valuation of the purely partisan dynamic that drives our discontent. Since the early 90s, Big Media doesn't serve the Government; it serves the Republican Party and follows the scripts provided.
But I don't disagree with this. One key theme of my last book is the partnership formed between the establishment media and the right-wing, and how the former serves the latter. Chapter 2 is entitled (I didn't pick this): "How Great American Hypocrites Feed Off One Another -- Right-wing Smears and the Establishment Press" and details how the media and Right work in tandem.
I agree completely that one of the key biases of the media is its servitude to the GOP - I just don't think that's the only significant bias, and I think it remains to be seen whether, in a Democratic administration, the media returns to something resembling a healthy, vibrant adversarial press. I think they'll try to torpedo the Democratic President with the types of petty, tawdry attacks that plagued Bill Clinton, but that isn't the same as a press that is serving as a meaningful check on Government abuses.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox