At Time, favored sorts were allowed to vet, polish and rewrite their quotes. I know this because, having once called Kissinger for comment, the bureau chief went ballistic when I filed.

“I’ll have to call Henry back and apologise,” she seethed. evidently she did just that because the quotes, when they appeared, were sharper, more insightful and generally reflected better on the speaker than those I initially took down.

Being on a first-name basis with celebs, political or otherwise, is very important to these people. It makes them feel important, gives them an impressive name or two to drop at dinner parties, and it also cements the celebs’ monopoly on being the standard sources of the go-to quote.

Ever wondered why Jesse Jackson, a man of no discernible achievements, reigned for decades as the primary black spokesman? The above attitude should explain it.

At BusinessWeek, which was in the early stages of the decline that continues to accelerate, things were simply bizarre.

Here was a magazine purportedly for the investor class, but staffed by upper-middle-class lefties. At the weekly meetings, where we would sit about and toss up story ideas, the actual business never began until the obligatory half-hour of Bush bashing had concluded.

I heard every left fable you can imagine at those sessions — the coke-snorting, fascist chimpoid etc. If you bothered to mention that Bush has a better degree than Gore, the howls could be heard all the way up to Terry McGraw’s penthouse office. When Dan Rather’s draft-dodging smear exploded, it was accepted as an article of faith. Long after the superscript clue proved those documents to be forgeries, BW editors were still insisting that, you know, superscript typewriters were available back then. The sources were generally Kos etc.

No wonder I’m hearing from those still at BW that the mag is likely on the block next year. Given that it hasn’t put together two profitable quarters in a row for six years, it’ll be that or curtains.

This election is the MSM’s last roll of the dice. If they can’t push Chicago Slim over the top, they know that demographics, technology and reader disenchantment spell their doom.

Just you watch: If Big Ears makes it to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., the push will be on to give the US an “unbiased” national media/broadcaster, a la the BBC. Lots of jobs for the worshippers in that little gig.

Oh, and expect the return of the fairness doctrine, but on steroids. Blogs like this one can expect DOJ attention.

Maybe it’s my imagination that is on steroids. Sure hope it is — but after watching the Obamabots swarm over anything remotely critical, I shudder to think what they will do when the cudgels of government are firmly in their righteous little fists.

I understand that AP and UPI might be going the way of the whale bone corset, but interjecting it with the new media might be an evolutionary move.

That being said – until we somehow regain a level of neutrality in the universities, we will see nothing but wave upon wave of newly indoctrinated sojourners of the left

- and the professorial class becomes ever more aggressive in their mission..

Sure, their business models are crap and they are all losing money, but as others have said, the Disneys and NBCs and Viacoms (let alone the New York Times and WaPo, etc.) are all ignoring business in order to elevate their front man to the top. Have the media ever exercised this much power in an election before? They may be losing money, but their influence is still decisive.

I have said since February that the most interestin gthing about this election is to see whether the media will select our presidents from now on. They made what would have been a landslide a close election in 2004. But this time, after laying the groundwork narrative for 8 years, they are on the brink of having their candidate elected and their worldview accepted by a majority. Waning power? I don’t see it.