Why would the Akron Beacon Journal refuse to cover the story about yesterday's important U.S. Senate debate over spying on Americans? Why no mention of what happened at all? Nothing. Not even a small print blurb in their nation section.
The debate took place during most of the day, not in the middle of the night. Apparently, the Beacon must have concluded that news about giving telecommunications companies immunity from prosecution for their complicity with the president's illegal warrantless wiretapping program, is not that important of a story. Spying on Americans without warrants, unConstitutional on all levels, does not rise to some predetermined threshold level of importance to Beacon Journal editors and publishers. I wonder why that is?
Instead, the Beacon's front page today, chosen by its editors, splashes a large picture of Bush overtop yet another printed out Bush lie…"Bush: Economy is 'pretty good'."
The Senate debated yesterday for some 8 hours on one of the most important and controversial topics of the Bush/Cheney administration…..illegal spying on Americans. A controversy that has been going on for years now. The Senate was debating a new FISA law re-write to replace the atrocious piece of garbage rammed through in August under the hysteria of fear generated by choreographing the phoney scare tactic words of Mike McConnell, the Intelligence chief, Michael Chertoff, Homeland Security Director and the Bush White House.
The bill passed in August has a February sunset provision….thus requiring a re-do. Yesterday, the new bill was presented to the Senate by Harry Reid(D-NV) and as promised, Christopher Dodd(D-CONN) came back from the campaign trail to lead debate with a promise to filibuster if it became necessary. Reid later pulled the bill and will re-introduce it in January, 2008. The bill has an immunity from civil suits provision for communications companies who cooperated with Bush/Cheney's illegal spying on Americans program going as far back as February, 2001.
Several very patriotic and inspirational floor speeches were given over the course of the day. Ted Kennedy's speech was as powerful as a speech gets in the Senate. Russ Feingold(D-WI) also delivered a statesman-like speech defending Constitutional rights for Americans while pointing out the travesty of lawbreaking that has made up the current Bush/Cheney regime. Chris Dodd was strong and spot on with his words thoughout the day.
But the Beacon didn't find any of it newsworthy. Not even a whisper. I wonder why that is? There was plenty of room for another goofy looking picture of the Commander Guy telling more lies about a "pretty good" economy….a "pretty good" economy that is going into recession and has staggeringly stratospheric national deficits, most of which were racked up over Bush's two failed terms in office, mercifully ending January, 2008. But there was no room for commenting on, or reporting of, Senate debate and strategy concerning whether the executive branch of government can simply violate ANY provision of the Constitution they so desire, have private firms co-operate in that lawbreaking, and then demand immunity from civil liability when those firms are caught redhanded.
Does the Akron Beacon Journal NOT want it's readers to know the substance and details of what happened on the Senate floor yesterday? Ohio's own Sherrod Brown even spoke for a spell, correctly pointing out the folly of granting amnesty to co-conspiratorial corporations. But the Beacon turned it's back on the whole thing, instead deciding to print another he said/they said story, this time about the economy. Bush talks, his critics talk, the Beacon can't figure out who's telling the truth, we have to decide who's telling the truth. It's like Bill O'Reilly's show. While that sideshow goes on, on the front page, nothing but silence on the crimes of the worst administration in American history.
The print media has helped in the dumbing down of America. Yes, they have. Not willing to offend any of their readers, print media exists only to expose it's thousands of subscribers to it's sponsors ads every day. Taking a position or reporting on important, contentious issues is just soooo…..divisive and controversial. Not the ideal condition for selling stuff. Besides, someone may get offended and drop their subscription….then the number of readers promised to sponsors would be smaller. Rates would be lower. Profits would go down.
I still find it hard to believe. One of the most important days in the Senate…..but as far as the Beacon Journal was concerned, the Senators were all alone in the woods talking, nobody heard them…..so did it even happen?
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
This is bigger than the Beacon Journal. Our media seldom if ever carries any substance about congressional debates. The most we ever get is a sound byte or two. I expect the Beacon didn't carry it because there wasn't a result. Harry Reid tabled the discussion.
Rev,
I would guess that the Beacon did not cover it because there was no wire services coverage. Perhaps the assaults on civil liberties and corruption of government/business has become so ubiquitous as to be mundane and no longer worthy of coverage.
The Times and WaPo buried the story in the 20 plus pages.
Now we're faced with an appendage of the corrupt Washington establishment, the major media, working against the people because of huge conflicts of interest of the monied kind.
I don't think it's that insidious. The media leans decidedly left, but they are also in the entertainment and sales industries. If the daily newspapers were repeating the congressional debates verbatim every day, you and I might like it, but it wouldn't do much to increase circulation or profit. If it would, then they certainly would do it. All businesses like profit. Let's face it, most people would rather read about the Browns or Britney than Congress.
To you now, the media exists to make profit. That is there reason for being.
And you also agree the media is doing what "we the people" want. I don't buy that one either.
I never speak for what "most people would rather read"
Finally, do you no longer believe the media has an obligation to the American people?