What is wrong with the press? I see four big problems.
First is perception: Of course, the press "presses" that wrong perception to its own advantage but it is an erroneous perception. No one is completely objective but the press pretends to such omniscience and encourages us to believe they are totally objective. Other points of view are either ignored or villified.
Second, the nature of the business. The press, as in the MSM, exists to make money. It must do so by increasing readership numbers and thereby attracting advertisers. Reporters, news readers and others don't like this crass characterization of their "high-minded" profession but the bottom line rules all.
In order to salve their consciences and appear noble, reporters kick against this reality and pretend that they are above such concerns. One way they do this is to convince media moguls that "public issues" must have some play in the publication/broadcast. But it must be accomplished without hurting the bottom line so the press must find issues such as social justice or "we're looking out for the little guy" stories to buttress their pretense while not driving away their advertisers. Reporters therefore, while proclaiming to be dedicated to "the truth", constantly search for something to hold up their fantasy.
Third, the Watergate Effect. Part of the problem can be traced back to Woodward and Bernstein, who romanticized the idea of a reporter taking on the government and bringing it down. The journalism students which entered school before Watergate and after Watergate were markedly different in their ideas of the role of a reporter. While pre-Watergate journalism students were largely motivated by informing the public, the post-Watergate students were often drawn by the idea of power and influence. That is a broad generalization but having my own journalism studies spanning that period I can at least attest anecdotally to the effect of Watergate.
Lastly, exclusivity. Journalists tend to be exclusive. Where long ago journalists saw themselves as making large numbers of friends and contacts among the newsmakers, now journalists see newsmakers as adversaries to be brought down should they get too uppity. The result is a narrowing of the points of view to which a journalist is exposed in his or her everyday life. Some ninety percent of journalists are liberal and that is the point of view with which they surround themselves. Since so many around them hold the same point of view, why, obviously, only an idiot would believe otherwise. Add to this the heavy concentration of Northeastern liberals in positions of power in the MSM and you have ignorance of most of America and its concerns and a serious tilting in favor of stories about or concerning the Northeast.
Actually these are just a few of the problems. I didn't see the program. Were any of these issues discussed by the panelists? If not, they are still living in a fantasyland.
Good post........