For what does blogging stand for, if not access to pure facts? We’ve been screaming about it all year. We should take it upon ourselves to validate those journalists of integrity who are being bypassed by the MSM. The most effective way to battle their bias is to counteract them with other, better, ideas.

Look, if we don’t do it, honorable journalists like Rosett will be too discouraged to continue. Why should they bust their chops and risk their lives as the world passes them by, unknowing and uncaring? These people are heroes.

We care. Millions of us care.

Shows you what the criteria for a Pulitzer is.

I prefer the word honesty to truth. Truth can be shaded until it is obscured while honesty attempts to work in light rather than shadows.

When (or, if ever) the MSM begins working in the light I might stop bashing it. Maybe. At any rate, I remain confident that I needn’t make plans to stop for a very long time.

Against all things “MSM?” A flaw in somebody’s logic? I have long argued that someone possessing a soft science Ph.D. should be considered an idiot until proven otherwise. I also believe that someone employed by the MSM should be considered a flunky for the liberal establishment until proven otherwise. Exceptions to the general rule exists and I have never denied it. After all, I am a fan of both Charles Krauthammer and Anne Applebaum. They are definitely charter members of the MSM.

NB: I’m not making any claim as to the accuracy of what they say about the photographs or the seriousness of the charge against the Putlizer committee, just pointing out a flaw in the logic of the somewhat knee-jerk attacks against all things “MSM” (except for the parts of the MSM that are approved like John Hideraker, Michael Barone, Michelle Malkin etc.)

I wonder how much research it would take to calculate the total circulation losses of the publications involved? Perhaps Pulitzer could issue another prize for the company suffering the least amount of readership loss? Perhaps 2 Pulitzers could be awarded, one for the lowest total loss and one for the lowest percentage loss?

The release of the analysis of election results by Congressional district reflects the true state of the MSM. After huffing and puffing and blowing just as hard they could, 59% of the districts went for W. Even better, from my POV, the Reps have 18 weak seats to defend while the Dems have 31. An even break will result in a 6 seat pickup by the Reps.

Way to go Big Media! Stick to your guns and uphold your lack of principles. Maintain the illusion for the ever diminishing group of diehard believers in a lost cause until the last ripple on the pond has vanished with your submersion. Always remember, you’re reaping all that you have sown.

How can one simultaneously deride the “MSM”; say that it’s out-of-touch, behind-the-times, maybe even downright evil, and complain about who gets what “MSM” award bestowed upon by the selfsame “MSM”?

And if there ever is a Pulitzer for blogginig that will pretty much be the end of the blogging phenomenon.

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/43885.htm

Apparently, the “reforms” that Kofi Annan is now touting were ones that he had previously squelched when the US suggested them.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/2005_04.php#010066