What I find just as disturbing is that journalists who did question the administration and people who just simply didn't believe Bush and Cheney's information were called cowards, unpatriotic, Saddam apologists, Chamberlains, etc etc.

Rep John Hostettler, One of the 6 Republicans who would not vote for action on Iraq was visited by Cheney. Cheney asked for his vote. He asked to see evidence. Cheney tells him "you don't have the security clearance" to view such things. In other words, we don't have any.

While I understand the media negligence in the economic crisis and the negligence in the war are somewhat comparable, one was perpetuated by financial figures and one was perpetuated by high ranking government officials. One reports to the government and can be FOId, and one reports to no one, can ignore FOIs, can hide behind "security clearances" and, once the war gets under way, can hide behind the troops (how dare you question me when our troops are out there?). Clinton did the same thing with Belgrade.

So while the journalistic behavior is somewhat comparable, I would actually say it is more negligent in the case of the economy because there was not as much government muzzling going on as there is with war.

Oh, and people get bored with financial reporting. News needs ratings, investigations take time, and advertisers pay the bills.

So what sort of political leaning is Salon and the reporter in the article alledged to have? Because I'm hearing more and more conservatives on tv and radio blaming the financial crisis on the media for too much reporting.