Just shows how most of what passes for journalism, especially at the evening news show level, is more for prime time entertainment than public education.
Exciting ride on the big red fire engine vs. boring piece on bearded, sweaty freaks presenting a middle ages culture rant via subtitles.
That's what made Karen Hughes and here embed process case study PR. Notice there was no "liberal" press leading up to the invasion of Iraq. Why? Some did ask tough questions (Helen Thomas) and were punished for it, but most absolutely did not ask tough questions or follow up after the initial response if they did. And the questions were out there, the issues were out there, the same ones we are dealing with today as far as what happens when the formal shooting stops.
Well, debating the war would be boring and the administration was already well out in front on the "with us or against us -- patriot or traitor" campaign. Lose lose.
Going to war represented not only a ratings positive but the chance to have a "heroic" front row seat. But, ask too many tough questions, and your guy is covering the 125th Field Latrine Unit 80 miles from all the big bangs and booms.
The press may have culturally liberal leanings given their demographics, but the bottom line involves profit, careerism and some degree of laziness (to be fair, the number of reporters has been shaved to the bone by these organizations, so the ability to have subject expertise is very limited today).
Charon