It's pretty simple. There are a lot of things wrong about the news, but the biggest problem is that they're too busy reporting what people say, and don't spend enough time
reporting what the truth is. The cynical side of me says that it's because the people who become journalists these days aren't that smart, were trained to be journalists, and not to actually know anything, and that our reporters simply don't think critically (because it takes work to question what they are told).
Well, what happens is you get stories like Bush's budget.
http://www.nypost.com/business/17785.htm
Greenspan said that no one has presented a credible plan for cutting budget deficits, forecast to hit a record $521 billion in this fiscal year, though the White House has pledged to halve them by 2009.
http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/ne...ngI7lMmY7AUUqH!1452159429?urac=n&urvf=10766446419490.9126011593636759
"Others welcomed Bush's focus on deficit reduction at a time when hundreds of billions of dollars are being funneled into defending the country against the threat of terrorist attack. But they said his plan doesn't go far enough to shore up fiscal stability in a country already $7 trillion in debt.
So which one is it? They like his "focus" on the deficit, but turn around and say he's not making a significant effort to reduce it?
"Making the (tax) cuts permanent would add an estimated $1 trillion to deficits over the five year period beginning in 2009 -- the end-point for Bush's deficit reduction estimates."
This is me throwing a bone to the press, though it also proves my point. They cite opponents of the budget who say Bush is lying about what the budget will do. However, it's not the press pointing out the FACTUAL TRUTH that the budget won't work as advertised. It's only worth putting in a news story if somebody else says it.
This leads to some absurd situations. Bush will wheel out 15 economists who back his plan. Daschle will wheel out 150 economists who say the Bush plan is bullshit. What's the headline?
"Economists Disagree on the Bush Proposal"
True, people might disagree about the economic growth rate, but we shouldn't rely on a policy that requires an economic boom to work. We should plan for a mixed forecast, and if things go well, then they don't just go well. They go really freaking great. That's the kind of smart government we'll never get from this White House, and far be it from our media to call anyone on it.
So in a nutshell, our press has a tendency to take false claims at face value, and report them that way. If Bush woke up and said the sky was red, we'd get the headline:"Views on the color of the sky differ."
That is all.