Ed Wallis,
Thanks for your comments. Actually, I believe so much in letting readers decide that I think readers ought to also be deciding among material not conforming to principles of modern journalism — these principles are less than a century old and violate many of the principles of the founding fathers, particularly Jefferson.
Also, I think the Internet has taught us that modern journalism principles do not really work, as objectivity is impossible and truth is more a job for historians and think-tanks than generalists working under intense time pressure. Moreover, an agreed-to ethical code for journalism does not exist, and the variations that refer to themselves as “ethical codes” do not speak to the real issues. For instance, was the Duke Lacrosse Team entitled to be treated innocent until proven guilty? Should NBC have aired the video of the VA tech sniper? There is no place to turn to answer these very simple questions.
I think we will enjoy a more healthy society when we have a multitude of voices competing in a freewheeling marketplace of ideas rather than a supply chain with the NYT, WaPo, and the AP at one end, and monolithic government-friendly, center-left news that purports to be “the objective, verified truth” on the other.
