Actually, Rep. Kennedy, the press does cover the news
If Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I, wants to find the news media at work, he should look past the confines of Capitol Hill, and not just upward to the House of Representatives’ press gallery.
Kennedy vented his frustration at the news media the other day, when he turned from the podium on the House floor. “There’s two press people in this gallery,” he shouted during a discussion on the Afghanistan war. “We’re talking about (Rep.) Eric Massa (D-N.Y) 24-7 on the TV. We’re talking about war and peace, $3 billion, 1,000 lives and no press? No press. The press of the United States is not covering the most significant issue of national importance and that’s the laying of lives down in the nation for the service of our country. It’s despicable, the national press corps right now.”
As Kennedy should know after serving eight terms, very little news comes from speeches made on House or Senate floor. Generally those remarks might produce a TV sound-bite at most. And, if we’re talking numbers of seats filled in either house, much of that rhetoric takes place for the benefit of C-SPAN cameras with few congressional members present. As Kennedy must also know, the real work of Congress takes place mostly in committee meetings, private negotiations, staff meetings and memo exchanges—and in myriad gatherings with lobbyists and other outsiders and experts.
It’s also worth noting that Congress, and even the whole of government in Washington, D.C., is not the be-all and end-all of news coverage in America. As important as are issues of war and peace, there are many more topics and challenges facing Americans in everyday life.
Every day, tens of thousands of print, broadcast and online journalists provide us with news and information on widely varied subjects—local job and housing statistics, crime, education, weather and a zillion other topics—including plenty of in-depth reporting on Afghanistan. In recent years, we’ve even been able to get those news reports in new ways, and around the clock.
Like Kennedy, I, too, would much rather see more journalists spending more time, and more news organizations spending more resources and providing more pages and air time, on serious subjects rather than fluff, features and celebrity news. Of course, Congress has its own critics as to focus and serious work.
I do know good journalism is being practiced all across the nation. From just the week of Feb. 19, courtesy of the Associated Press Managing Editors Web site, come some examples of “watchdog” journalism:
--In Wichita, Kan., the Eagle reported on potential tax-document misrepresentation.
--The Salt Lake Tribune reported on political contributions from defense companies seeking congressional budget earmarks.
--The Press of Atlantic City, N.J., discovered that even as state budgets are stressed more every year, about $21 billion in property—about 10 percent of the total—in several major counties is tax-exempt.
--The Post-Crescent of Appleton, Wis., reported the state program that workers rely on for unemployment checks fell below federal standards in a third of key areas.
--The San Antonio Express-News reported there were more than 2,200 claims of abuse, neglect and bad medical care against San Antonio’s 55 licensed nursing homes between 2006 and 2009.
There’s more, on issues from health care to dangerous chemicals, public pensions to prisons.
Not all news reports and not all news organizations deserve high marks, and certainly some deserve low marks. Reduced staffing has limited investigative reporting and news reporting overall, even with the additional sources and resources of online news and blogging.
But Kennedy and those who saw or read about his televised rant should recognize that thousands upon thousands of journalists nationwide aren’t sitting down—in a House gallery or elsewhere—when it comes to reporting the news we all need from a free and independent press.
Gene Policinski is vice president and executive director of the First Amendment Center, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, D.C., 20001. Web: www.firstamendmentcenter.org. E-mail: gpolicinski@fac.org.

Mar 24, 2010 at 11:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
At least future had a reference, good for you. "He's also Fox News' fourth biggest investor".
Yet not second...
Mar 24, 2010 at 8:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
"...are you following me?"
-
If by following you do you mean am I going to continue to call you on your racist and inaccurate information on these blogs...yes.
Mar 24, 2010 at 8:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
If you did look under Coke you would find Buffet is listed, under the firm BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC warren is chairman and ceo of. To be more accurate bill gates owns more of it than does warren.
Listed under top institutional holder: BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=KO
Anything else from the peanut gallery, or is there more false data and information you want to peddle on these blogs.
Mar 24, 2010 at 7:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yahoo lists insiders and major direct holders on two separate pages...
Insiders: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ir?s=NWS
Major holders: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=NWS
Mar 24, 2010 at 11:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Not to mention the Yahoo numbers are based on Dec.-09 reporting, and the Prince has been buying up shares in 2010.
Mar 24, 2010 at 11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
I love pointing out RAF's ignorance. Per RAF's argument below, Warren Buffett would not be considered a top holder of Coca Cola. Note that Yahoo only reports "Major Direct Holders" and institutional holders. "Major Direct Holders" are insiders. Prince Al-Walweed, is not an insider. Note his stake in News Corp. is not disclosed, but he has stated he is second to Rupert Murdoch (see Fast Company article on him). So yes, a Saudi Prince has a major investment in News Corp., and thus Fox News.
Mar 24, 2010 at 11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia, through his Kingdom Holding Company, owns 7% of News Corp.'s shares, making Kingdom Holdings the second largest shareholder. [20][21] [22]
.
I would never normally site wikipedia but I have heard it enough times that I tend to believe it. If I am wrong, and Rhandi Rhodes is lying along with wikipedia...I apologize. That was not my larger point.
.
RAF...are you following me?
Mar 24, 2010 at 10:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Second largest owner of any publicly traded company is easy to check...yet no Saudi prince???
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=NWS
Mar 24, 2010 at 10:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
It is much worse than left or right. The corporate media is controlled and owned by corporations that pay for advertising. These corporations can control what and how things are reported.
.
For example, I will pick on Fox because they are an easy target but I believe ALL are guilty of simlar actions... The second largest owner of Fox News is a Saudi Prince. Does anyone honestly believe that coverage of what happens in the Middle East is going to be "Fair and Balance"? GE owns MSNBC, correct, cap and trade and fair converage...I can't believe that.
.
I listen to Rhandi Rhodes daily. She often rants about this very topic. She is left-wing but admits that it happens everywhere. Her suggestion is to watch the news...any news and see how many advertisements are for products you can't actually buy. The ask yourself, why would they advertise during that newscast or on that network.
.
The only answer is scary. Add this to the equation, corporations can now spend more money on campaigns. They will be more involved with your newscast.
.
For me, this is more scary for the future of this country than any health care legislation could be.
Mar 23, 2010 at 2:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
The author of this letter - Policinski - annoys me. He says we all need news from .".. a free and independent press."
Everyone knows that the national news media is not independent. CBS is far left, NBC/MSNBC is far left, PBS is far left, ABC is left, CNN is left of center, and FOX is right of center.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.