Not more powerful than ever, no. But definitely a major influence on people who can't, don't desire to, read between the lines (I dislike the term "MSM"; it is the Journalism Establishment that we are discussing).Establishment journalism was what did in Joe McCarthy, though historically McCarthy was in the right and was far more sinned against than sinning (thanks, Ann! Just reread Treason. Absolutely amazing that journalism can still stonewall that issue, with the historical record in plain sight). Establishment journalism is what turned Nixon out of office for things which other presidents had done far more than he. And Establishment journalism is what protected Clinton after he went to court to try to keep justice from being done, and lied to the judge under oath.
You would think that senators with defending that malfeasance would have to answer to the voters for it, but never a peep was heard of it, ever. And that is what justifies fear that our knowledge of the unbridled corruption of Hillary will have no effect in '08.
But the Internet does have some influence, primarily through its amplification via Rush and talk radio - and that is where we can expect to see the effort of Establishment Journalism to be focused next year. IMHO the establishment will attempt to suppress Rush by resurrecting the "Fairness" Doctrine. "Fairness" being defined, as in the bad old pre-Reagan days, as "conforming to the consensus of establishment journalism."
When that happens, it will go to SCOTUS, where the 5-4 majority which upheld the unconstitutional McCain-Feingold law no longer sits. It is now 4-3-2, with Roberts and Alito having not yet ruled. If Kennedy holds and Roberts and Alito rule correctly, not only the Fairness Doctrine but McCain-Feingold will be overturned. I would have them go further and rule that print journalism and the Internet, which are open to entry of new newspapers/web sites, are unambiguously protected by First Amendment. But that does not mean that they are not tendentious, but that they have a right to be tendentious - and that the government has no authority to award any journalist, or all of them, any presumption of objectivity. They are not under oath, and they are not subject to laws against perjury.
OTOH broadcasting, being a creature of FCC censorship of entrants into the field of radio transmission of speech, merits strict scrutiny to assure that the government (FCC) is not serving as a megaphone for a particular political POV . . . which is most assuredly what the FCC now in fact does by allowing licensees to promote the conceit that establishment journalism is objective.
The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . . It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam SmithHalf the truth is often a great lie. - Benjamin Franklin
Media bias bump