[teejers1]

Per a Gallup Poll two months ago, only 9% of Americans trust the mass media implicitly. Well over half have little confidence, and a third have no confidence at all. It is the media that has done this to itself over two generations. 

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

I think it may be about survival.  In this very noisy Internet world, only the screamers get noticed/heard.  Straight down the middle - what we generally grew up with - didn't/doesn't sell.  Thus, "journalism" as we knew it, falls by the wayside.

And a poster here chastised me for using the term Agenda-Driven MSM, pointing out that all outlets have an agenda and pursue that, such that the term "MSM" cannot be equated with a single agenda.  That gave me pause, and I realized that my proxy for MSM were the outlets that I considered the leaders in doing it right back in the day:  WaPo, NYT, and CNN.  Those, especially lately, have been agenda-driven.  But that doesn't mean other outlets aren't counterbalancing that - it's just that I'm not familiar with any of them, beyond Fox News, which is a fly by on the dial.  

In truth, I'm part of the "well over half" - although as noted previously, a law school buddy said he thought Bloomberg played it pretty straight.  [Probably should check them out].

[teejers1]

Per a Gallup Poll two months ago, only 9% of Americans trust the mass media implicitly. Well over half have little confidence, and a third have no confidence at all. It is the media that has done this to itself over two generations. 

And even in your case, doesn't your confidence rely on the fact that the MSM you trust conforms to your value judgments? Do you trust Fox News to the same degree that you trust CBS? If you perceive Fox as agenda driven, and CBS as neutral, most of us would disagree completely.

I think it may be about survival.  In this very noisy Internet world, only the screamers get noticed/heard.  Straight down the middle - what we generally grew up with - didn't/doesn't sell.  Thus, "journalism" as we knew it, falls by the wayside.

And a poster here chastised me for using the term Agenda-Driven MSM, pointing out that all outlets have an agenda and pursue that, such that the term "MSM" cannot be equated with a single agenda.  That gave me pause, and I realized that my proxy for MSM were the outlets that I considered the leaders in doing it right back in the day:  WaPo, NYT, and CNN.  Those, especially lately, have been agenda-driven.  But that doesn't mean other outlets aren't counterbalancing that - it's just that I'm not familiar with any of them, beyond Fox News, which is a fly by on the dial.  

In truth, I'm part of the "well over half" - although as noted previously, a law school buddy said he thought Bloomberg played it pretty straight.  [Probably should check them out].