The Failings of the Press [UPDATED]

The established media has much, much more to lose than bloggers when they flirt with the OSA. We know you despise us for what you see as "cowardice" but, together, we can achieve more. It wasn't bloggers that got millions marching against the war.

To Anon journalist:

Question 1: You say The established media has much, much more to lose than bloggers when they flirt with the OSA.
Can you explain this please? You may not get the next Blair or Bush interview, admittedly but what else? IMHO bloggers have less protection from excessive and abusive government use of the law, no big media company to back them up with money for decent lawyers if you publish and be damned; bloggers do not have readership/viewers in multiple-millions as the mainstream media does, to disseminate their story. Bloggers have jobs, families and houses to lose, legal fees to pay on their own, lives that can be destroyed in so many little ways. They are very, very brave.

Question 2: Are you actually saying millions marched against the war because Fleet Street/ BBC/ CNN told us too? Because this seems somewhat bizarre statement. We marched because the war was illegal and immoral, and perfectly obviously unwinnable. Iraq was a false target and any fool could see we were being lied to by our leaders. Hans Blix himself did a great job of showing how un-committed to inspections Blair and Bush were, how shallow the WMD arguement for war was.

In addition, many, but not all, established media (EM) outlets don't tell us what is really going on in Iraq. Instead we get fed the line the politicians want the EM to tell us. BBC and much print media's Iraq reporting is appalling. By contrast Dahr Jamail and Juan Cole report news that chills the soul, showing us images of what is being done in our name. It is our war, our countrymen started it and are dying for it. The least our EM can do is get the whole truth out, using first hand testimony and alerting us to the fact journalists in Iraq are working under more restrictions than they did under Saddam era: then we were told each and every time what restrictions were in place. Does having a US master mean this is unneccessary?

Question 3: I agree together bloggers and established media can do great things together, so when will the EM step up to the plate and report what is happening on blogs around the globe?
Why not discuss the positive implications of the internet to free speech, pass the story to a wider audience without having to do the whistleblowing yourselves?
Also why are there so few investigations into the reality of life in UK and US? Why avoid stories, use sloppy language and mis-represent?
As an example, even anti-war EM reporters insist on repeating Walter Wolfgang was manhandled out of Labour Party conference and briefly questioned under terror laws, like it was an aberation and not part of a pattern of abuse. 600 other peaceful protesters and dissenters were stopped and questioned by Police under Section 44 of the Terrorism laws that week in Brighton, for offenses as threatening to national security as walking a dog with anti-Blair/Bush sentiments on its collar.

Established media outlets are less trusted now than at any time in my recollection. So many crucially important truths are totally ignored or rapidly dropped by media moguls with agendas and friends in high places; so many hacks with no appetite for the full, whole and dirty truth. Younger people don't even consider the dead wood press anymore.

Our press is not free, but blogs are.
If you, as a journalist, are brave enough to lay it all on the line to get the truth out there, then do so.
Start by blowing a hole in the government's suppression of the Al Jazeera memo: the OSA is only being used to save Bush's blushes.