Why don't we hear more about the DSM in the mainstream media? According to Ann McFeatters, Washington bureau chief for the
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the
Toledo Blade, there will only be more coverage on the issue if there is
"some real news attached to it."Translated, that means no coverage until someone in the administration broaches the subject first, which of course they never will. By remaining silent about certain issues, the White House effectively controls the media. So despite a public outcry for coverage (by the first week of June, McFeatters had received more than 2,000 e-mails urging her to write about the memo... "the response has never been this intense before..."), it's unlikely that the story will get any more traction until someone in the press actually asks the administration a question, and actually gets an answer. But they won't ask the question until someone in the administration brings it up first. Around and around we go. The circular logic is evident, and it is working the same way with the
Karl Rove/Valerie Plame story;
no one in the press corps has asked about Turd Blossom's involvement yet, despite daily opportunities to do so. Both the press and the White House are dancing around the elephant in the room. Remember, it takes two to tango.
Newspapers have always been in the business of selling ads, but how I long for the days when the press was also obligated to uncover the truth, rather than just licking the boots of their corporate overlords.