Just what is it with the media, anyway?

An idiot I know likes to say

the establishment media are more fairly characterized by their pack mentality, the continuous dumbing down of the media product; and the inept laziness of their reporters who are willing to report whatever political spin meisters spoon-feed them, regardless of their sources partisan bent or accuracy of their story. While all of these factors are lamentable, none has anything to do with "bias".

How does this explain that in 2002... the establishment media were loathe to rebroadcast images of 9/11, specifically the tragic video of trapped victims leaping to their deaths from the upper floors. Their reasoning was that to do so would unnecessarily inflame American passions against the Muslim populace.

But in 2003... the establishment media was both quick and eager to broadcast humliating, but hardly abusive, photos from inside Abu Ghraib prison. The result of that decision was an uprising of inflamed Muslim passions against the United States.

And in 2004... the establishment media broadcast - and subsequently tried to spread - a story composed entirely of falsified documentation and the fradulently acquired reaction to those documents. The purpose of this story was to create an uprising of inflamed passions in the American electorate against George W. Bush.

And just days ago, establishment media outlet NEWS WEAK magazine published a story of interrogators at Guantanamo descrating the Koran by flushing it down a toilet. They published - and far too much later retracted - on the strength of an anonymous source passing on an unverified allegation. And what happened? Inflamed passions among Muslims in Afghanistan led to riots and 15 deaths.

Now they are trying to sell the rioting, and the resulting casualties, as unpredictable.

Nothing to see here, ladies and gentlemen... just keep moving along...