are really comprised of.

I have been having the same thoughts, when people were railing against the Media, untill I noticed the Blogs were just as bad.

even the must "neutral" can be obviously biased at times, like BTD, when Hillary said she was in the lead, not once did he ever make a post to point out that this excluded caucus states, (he is big on the pop vote deciding, but to me ignoring the pop vote from caucuses kinda defeats the pop vote meaning) he gave her a pass on it.

its then I took a step back and all blogs are just as bad as the media, Huffington post loves to post ugly pics of Hillary with their stories,

Bloggers are just as biased as the rest of us and they have less accountability to be neutral, though I don't know if they really have to be.

but to me Bloggers aren't much better then pundits, they do the exact same things as the media pundits.

What Bloggers choose NOT to cover is just as important as what they do cover.

Good piece, Bob.

I once had high hopes for the blogoshere, but I see now that it is just as likely to be used to manipulate and disinform as the corporate media.

But its advantage remains that a diary like this would never see the light of day in the corporate media which can only admire its own navel.

so I have been trying to think of how this problem of the media bias could be fixed. and the only thing  I can think of is we need government sponsored Independent media.

oxymoron? The problem with all media is eventually they need money, which means usually ad revenues, which turns into them pandering to their advertisers. you see it, if a media does something you don't like, you threaten their advertisers with boycotts and what not and THEY force changes.

We can't expect the Media to be truly Neutral if a corporation could easily say kill that story or your fired.

we need a media that has a constant source of funding that they won't have to worry about drying up and thus they are free to just report without having to watch the purse strings. The best I can think of is a government sponsored media, where the government doesn't have the power to cut funding. It obviously wouldn't work

but something has to be done, Journalists and the media are not bound to the truth or the people, they are bound by ad dollars, even the blogs are too.

how  many SEIU advertisments you see here? what would they do if there was a front page story they didn't like or a topic they don't want dicussed? which would happen the topic doesn't get talked about or MyDD says screw you and talks about it anyways?

I remember a few weeks ago KO reported about how Bill O didn't like something and his corporate owners when to KOs bosses and luckily they didn't care they let KO talk about it, but I then thought wow what if they did care, they can easily kill a story because at the end of the day KO is going to care about his paycheck not the truth.

we need to do something to fix the media in this country

My own posts have been fairly infantile!!!!

Guilty as charged.

The leading lights....... where have they gone.

I used to enjoy reading intelligent thought provoking commentary from the headline bloggers. Where have they all gone.

I think this primary season is making us all nuts. (And for that I blame Clinton ;-)

Nice diary, Bob.  

Oddly enough, I think there's a possible upside.  I lurked at the progressive blogs for ages, and was compelled to jump in as things began to get flat-out squirrel turd nutty.

Maybe, once the debacle of the primary winds down and the smoke clears, we'll have more quality people than before to help steer this out of control chuckwagon away from the precipice.

Here's to hoping.

but I have a good memory and I thought I saw Oprah on TV at a Jesse Jackson rally in 1988. If so then this doesn't jibe with the opt-repeated scenario that she's never been involved with a candidate before.

The difference between Markos' constant ant-Clinton/pro-Obama ravings (and anti-Clinton supporter ravings) from 1/08 through the present, and Jerome making a valid point in a respectable fashion in a single diary one time, while citing a questionable source?

In other words, which is worse:

1.  "Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and all of the mothers of all Clinton supporter in the United States of America trade sex for cash and should rot in hell" repeated several times a day by Markos himself; or

2.  A single post by Jerome indicating "certain questionable facts were reported on a website about Obama."

Of course, I'm paraphrasing, and lumping months and months and months of constant filth and personal insults directed at me and other Clinton supporters DIRECTLY from Kos into a single quote, but you get the point, right?

Get your own blog or website if you don't like how things work on blogs or websites you DO NOT own.