From article <1qvampINNmhf@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, by stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU:








I believe that this is not contradictory on the basis that
the quality of media reporting varies greatly based on the
subject at hand.  The media has proven itself very accurate
is the areas of presenting raw, undisputed data.  One good
example would be the weather page in which high and low
temperatures of the previous day for a large number of
locations are posting.  There is little evidence to show
that they are in error.

The American media has failed us in its analysis of complex
events, however.  I'm sure that we can come up with many
news stories that have left us angry because so many facts
have been ommitted.  Cases that come to mind are the
invasion of Panama, the war with Iraq, the disaster in Waco,
the issues surrounding the acceptance of gays into the
military, the war on drugs, and many others.

The story that you bring to light was regarding the new
sex survey.  While I'm sure that due to lazyness some of
the data was ommitted from the article, I would venture to
guess that the data that was presented did not deviate
from the survey.  I do, however, think that it would be
folly to have blind faith in a single newswriter's
analysis of this data.  In this particular case, there was
little analysis, and the reader was left to draw his/her
own convictions.

Many netters, Mr. Cramer included, often forget that the
American media are merely a number of businesses, who's
purpose in life is to make money for their owners and
stockholders.  Revenues come largely from advertisers
who merely want maximum useful exposure per dollar.  The
media is like fast food; the quality of the food (or of
the reporting) will improve only if the customers demand
as such.  Otherwise, it is business as usual.