The Problem In News Isn't News But Those Delivering It

I always get a sick feeling in my stomach when I read this stuff:

I think that hard news reporting is a great social good. But as the Internet has unbundled news, it has become clear that this isn't a social good for which many people are willing to pay. Reporters who thought that political and international news reporters, plus a few people who write long reported series about poverty and related “serious” subjects, constituted the apex of their profession, have been humbled to learn that readers considered us a moderately interesting freebie to thumb through on the way to the important stuff in the sports section.

This from Megan McArdle, a member of the club that wasted everybody's time arguing the travel arrangements of Mitt Romney's dog. How about these post-election "scandals" they're trying to keep alive? The hero Bradley Manning got 35 years. HELLO! The hero Snowden's in Russia. HELLO! The hero Assange is in hiding. HELLO! Whites ain't looking so good after Trayvon. HELLO!

It never occurs to NewAgers - they're doing it wrong. Fuck the sports section, they're mixed up with astrology, and the articles on yoga insure it never crosses their minds that maybe, just maybe, their voices might not be the most pertinent at the moment, if they ever were. They don't affect my life. I know people who die, they don't report it. They don't investigate. They don't care. I don't know what they care about that I'm expected to pay for. They don't topple the wicked. They can't tell right from wrong unless Anthony Weiner's waving his dick at 'em. I mean, when they're that clueless, why are they in the news business?

 

There's a lot of people out there who know they'll never be heard, and some of them sure seem to have a clue to what should be done.

These so-called "journalists" are so stupid they can't even establish water ain't medicine in their pages yet.

Pay them? I take it back:

They're less than clueless,...