Matt Drudge has one of his own little reports up on his website concerning coverage of the convention(s) by the networks.
The last paragraph of the article says this:
Addressing the challenges of covering politics in a politically polarized environment, CBS Rather stated that "fear has increased in every newsroom in America," and added that reporting on explosive issues can bring a torrent of e-mails and phone calls. That can lead to a situation, he said, in which journalists conclude that "when you run this story, you're asking for trouble with a capital 'T'. . . Why run it?"
To me this is sorta good and sorta bad.
I think it is about time that reporters thought about their public when considering whether to run a story or not (I think there is a read-between-the-lines issue of how the story is portrayed as well). I think that too many times the media tries to decide issues for us. One issues gets over-reported while another one gets no play at all.
There are obvious downsides to this as well. We are definitely going in the wrong direction if the press is legitimately afraid to run a story because of the public backlash. I stress legitimately, here.
But for me, the good side is that I feel like the press has forgotten that we are the customer here. It was feeling like the elite media was trying to tell us what to feel, what should be important to us, etc. I really think they were/are getting out of control.
All other feelings, sentiments, aside. I think that this sounds like the public is finally standing up for itself.
What do you think? Do Rather's comments scare you or make you feel like you have a little more control?