>>>See also http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5747
>>
>>It's really a shame that this source too is biased. Seems there are few-to-none actually unbiased sources any more. This gets everyone operating with their own version of a truth, rather than the real truth.
>
>
>Truly the crux of the modern information age. Personally I preferred the old news business. They were wrong sometimes but you didn't have to constantly wonder about motive and POV.
>
>I think part of the problem (if like me you consider it a problem) is that we are now in a 24/7 news cycle that sometimes leads to sensationalism and/or sloppiness in the race to be first with the news. And blogs are making matterws worse IMO. Not only is there is a race to announce the news, there is now a race to announce OPINIONS about the news. That whirring noise you hear is Edward R. Murrow spinning in his grave.

I'm more cynical than you. I don't blame a 24/7 "news cycle" at all.
In fact you'd think that so much time devoted to "news" would result in a huge variety of issues and more in-depth analysis/discussion/balance/etc.

But the trend is to focus on "the big item".
Something as innocuous as the "runaway bride" story was 24/7 on CNN for 3+ days straight.
And they then claim it was viewer-driven!!!!
The war in Lebanon now has displaced anything else (except as headline mentions) for a few weeks now. And it's mainly repetition.

The rush to be first may have some impact, but that is really just abrogation of the first rule of journalism - verify the facts. I've heard a lot of "while we've been unable to verify it, it is reported by xxxxx that....". Just another cheap trick not worthy of any real "news" organization.

Anderson Cooper is getting high praise for bringing emotion into the "news". In my opinion he should be fired for such "reporting". That would be fine in a documentary, but has no place in "news".