Missouri, Fairness and Justice in Today's New York Times

Yes, St. Louis County and so, Missouri and fairness and gross unfairness, all in today's, Sunday New York Times.

It's an important, if brief read. A real eye-opener and certainly not limited to just that area.

Policing for Profit in St. Louis County

And not just one article, one op/ed piece but two, originating out of Missouri politics and events lately. Here's the second. Also brief but, I think, again, important:

Beat the Press

Daniel Schorr: What we need in our press and media

There is a terrific article out right now on Daniel Schorr and his and the press' role in our government and world. I'll put a link to it at the bottom, in case you're interested on the rest of it and quote a bit of it here: Journalists are not supposed to be friends of presidents. Dan Schorr understood that. Schorr was not a pamphleteer. Though he was a crisp and efficient writer, Schorr inclined toward the microphone and camera as a CBS correspondent who got run out of Moscow, as the CNN correspondent who got the cable network going with a typically-pointed interview of then-President Jimmy Carter and as NPR’s resident truth teller until shortly before his death Friday at age 93. The clip that will be repeated for as long as broadcast journalism history classes are taught will be of Schorr, broadcasting live from outside the Senate Watergate hearing room with a copy of Richard Nixon’s White House “enemies list.” The list of Americans who had gotten on the wrong side of the president had just been revealed and Schorr was reading through the first twenty “enemies.” After he finished with California Congressman Ron Dellums, he read the next name—without a dramatic pause or any show of emotion: “Daniel Schorr, a real media enemy.” What was important about Schorr was not that his name was on the enemies list, however. It was what he did to get it there. Schorr’s unofficial beat was always the abuse of power. He challenged Soviet communists and American capitalists (including his bosses at CBS and CNN) with the same relentless questioning. And when he got the story, he got it out—even if his editors refused to let him go with it personally. Famously, in the mid-'70s, when Schorr was leaked a copy of the secret “Pike Report”—named for the chair of an House Intelligence Committee inquiry into Central Intelligence Agency intrigues and illegality—CBS refused to go with it. Schorr promptly leaked the report to the Village Voice, a newspaper he was certain would run it. That was too much for CBS and, despite having won Emmy Awards in three of the four preceding years, Schorr was soon no longer working for CBS. At CNN, he clashed with Ted Turner over the cable executive’s determination to censor films—a serious issue with Schorr, who forged an unlikely partnership with musician Frank Zappa, another free-speech absolutist. In 1985, his CNN contract was not renewed and Schorr moved to NPR, where we got to know one another. My favorite moment came when he was asked his opinion of the decision by a 5-4 Supreme Court majority to stop the Florida recount of 2000 and award the presidency to George W. Bush, who had lost the popular vote by more than 500,000 and who appeared to be on his way to losing Florida and, with it, the Electoral College. The issue had been settled and most journalists were parsing things in a manner that might allow them to get on the good side of the notoriously vengeful Bush-Cheney team. But Schorr minced no words. The court decision was, he declared, “a judicial coup” carried out by “the Gang of Five, philosophically led by archconservative Antonin Scalia.” At the age of 84, Schorr was making himself the enemy of another administration by speaking a truth that most journalists would not. Link to original post: http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20100726/cm_thenation/37930;_ylt=AjqiR2I2pqPiPJuXnRx3bg79wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTJoMDBuN2lhBGFzc2V0A3RoZW5hdGlvbi8yMDEwMDcyNi8zNzkzMARjcG9zAzYEcG9zAzMEc2VjA3luX2hlYWRsaW5lX2xpc3QEc2xrA2RhbmllbHNjaG9ycg--

Moving on

We are in such a huge era of change, financially and technologically and people just have little idea, it seems, about what's going on and where we're headed.

I've felt that one of the great things that's happening to us, concerning the environment, is the elimination of newspapers.

Delivering news daily on sheets of new, virgin paper simply makes no good sense. It's antiquated and destructive.

We should get our news online as soon as possible and then power all those computers with solar energy from photovoltaic cells and do away with the power companies.

That's fodder for another entry.

What's really unfortunate about eliminating newspapers is that it does away with the Fourth Estate.

Hell, we almost don't have anyone now, to inform us of what our government is doing nationally and internationally.

With all that this, Bush Administration has gotten away with in these last 8 years, it seems more likely than ever that governments could and would, possibly, in nightmarish form, get away with whatever they want since no one would be there, in strength, to report their actions and activities.

Would the Nixon administration have fallen even as late as it did if not for 2 reporters at the Washington Post, doing research and digging and persevering?

The conclusion of almost everyone is no.

Besides the somewhat "universal experience" and information that we all get as a culture, this is a very real issue and problem for us, culturally, nationally.

I think the consensus is, too, that, even with a proliferation of blogs, they don't--and won't--have the power of The New York Times or other media.

And sure, maybe this will change and some other reporting structure will come into being but it seems the collapse of a great deal of print journalism is going to fail before these other organizations come into being.

In short order, things are changing and going to change a great deal more.

The "man on the street" isn't too much aware of what's going on, too, I believe.


More on change soon...