Media matters makes a good point
Mood:  a-ok
Topic: Media Matters
One site that I don't go to enough is MediaMatters.org. I haven't been checking it much as I have more or less given up on watching televison news. They recently posted proof positive of why I don't watch television news as well as what I have been blathering on about all this whole year:

Yesterday, in conjunction with a forum they hosted on media bias, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) and other House Judiciary Committee Democrats released a study by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service examining coverage of key news stories on 13 cable news programs on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News Channel in the three days after each story broke. The study shows that events such as the release of the Downing Street Memo, a secret British intelligence memo suggesting that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence to support its case for war in Iraq, and the revelation of Jeff Gannon's true identity received little or no coverage, while events such as the Scott Peterson trial and the beginning of the Michael Jackson trial received substantial coverage.

For example:

*The Downing Street Memo received no coverage on the 13 cable shows in the three days after the British news media reported on it.

*The revelation that Jeff Gannon, a partisan operative, had attended dozens of official White House press briefings using an assumed name also received no coverage in the three-day period after it occurred.

On the other hand:

The filing of formal charges against Michael Jackson received coverage by 10 of the 13 shows on the first day alone, with four shows leading with the story.

*The Scott Peterson verdict received coverage on five shows the first day and eight the second, with five shows leading with the story.

So, usually bitch about this by citing 'Desperate Housewives' or whatever trendy show is on but it is also the celbrity trials that divert our focus in between Popes dying and Terry Schiavo like things.

Ask yourself why is this happening? Can it really be just a matter of ratings? Our media has dropped the ball and kicked it off the playing feild. The Administration seems to hold all the cards. Just ask Newsweek.

And should you be curious as to what that "Downing Street Memo" said I have added the pertinent part(emphasis added):

"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

Umm, and oh yeah that memo was written on July 23, 2002...