It's even gotten to the point that profit doesn't matter. MSNBC pulled Phil Donahue (a very profitable - but balanced discussion format) from MSNBC. NBC financial cable news (including MSNBC) was selling the market long, while short sellers we're cashing in. Now, that no amount of long selling makes sense, these same financial {genius} operatives are "war" experts. I quit watching our natoinal corporate news - they're either stenographers, cheerleaders, or working for someone's interests other than me or my fellow citizens.

It's hard to believe that MSNBC would pull the highly profitable Donahue show from the evening line-up. I read somewhere in a discussion group (mind you, winning an argument on the internet is like winning the special olympics) that it was part of a payback for the law suit being dropped. It's extreme and probably not true, but the quality of state side news is less than 'journalistic'. There is no distinction between allegation and fact anymore - almost like our broadcasters are part of an evolving information ministry. Weird.

If you have a digital box, you can get NWITV (a smorgashboard of news services, including CBC, BBC, German, Mexican and others.) Their coverage is excellent (and not 'in-bedded'). Basic cable will get you CCTV, CSPAN (they are rebroadcasting CBC and other news services in the evening), and some othe international news (sometimes not translated).

Oh, BTW, our local news coverage of international events is more balanced that the nationals (well, except for that austrailian tycoon's local clones:).

Our understanding of history probably only goes back 3 years. We know what the problem is - but we can't talk about it - These are [indeed] strange times:-).


>Hi Terry,
>
>At least you acknowledged the fact about "balanced" journalism or lack of it. When I was over there at Houston in the year 2000 on a programming job, I always CNN being the Clinton News Network. Over here, I would like to say BBC offers a broader perspective.
>
>In Asia, or at least in regional news networks here, the take on the Iraq 'liberation' (or 'invasion' to some) is very varied, depending on the long standing history of the Asian country with respect to the US or Britain.
>
>
>>>Btw, how is it over there as far as the US incursion into Iraq?... Over here we are always glued to BBC and CNN.. What do you think are the prevailing sentiments of the silent majority or for that matter minority?
>>
>>Many of us in the states rely on foreign news services for "balanced" journalism. When the telecommunications act of 1994 was passed, million dollar book deals and speaking engagements were passed out to some of our elected officials that supported the bill by national and foreign media tycoons.
>>
>>It's funny, the same outlets, that sold the markets long and ignored the short sellers, are now foreign relations experts! Even now, polls are indicating that American's are not watching the tube like we used to. I, for example, listen to NPR or alternative "college" music stations (okay, every once in a while I watch Sponge Bob and Perry Mason re-runs:).
>>
>>No poll on the silent majority, but it's an even bet there may be one.