It's worse than that! Look back at how the media handled the lead-up to the war! Since I can't post a URL, you'll have to find it yourselves. Go to the PBS website and click on "Bill Moyers Journal." Then search for "Buying the War." Watch the show and read the transcript.

I can hear the right-wingers already howling about how PBS is an anti-American commie front organization and can't be expected to be "fair and balanced." We live in a very strange world indeed if NPR and PBS are considered the left-wing counterbalances to Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Rush Limbaugh!

Of course the Government has control of the media, you just have to study the history to see how the Government held back the truth on WWI & II. Vietnam opened up the media opportunities but since Desert Storm and this fiasco we are being restricted again and getting very shallow and biased reports. We get the death toll of American soldiers but the maimed and mentally destroyed are slow to be counted/hidden so we cannot see how devastating the war really is. The forget about what we have done to the Iraqi people, they don't count, we just want their OIL. mmmmm you have to go beyond the local papers to get the truth

You are dreaming if you think the Bush administration is manipulating the media. Remember the left and the media think that Bush is not smart enough to tie his own shoes, thus he could not creat a conspiracy of such magnitude. Further, he has let the media ride-along with the soldiers during the war. Something I personally am not to fond of. If this war was for oil, then we should be using that oil to pay for this mess.

What planet are you from? Bush "controlling" the media? Journalists are the most leftist profession alive and neither the Democrats or Repbulicans have any sway on what they report. I seem to recall the 4000th death being displayed prominently on nearly every news publication I saw. Now, why didn't it receive hours of endless coverage on the major networks? Sorry, the sensationalism just isn't there anymore and THAT is what sells for the media. If they won't get an agitated or emotionally involved audience as a result, they won't talk about it. This is not discounting the tradgedy of the 4000 deaths or saying its not something worth noting. Its just saying that it isn't as sensational as the 100th, 1000th, etc deaths. So please save your "republicans and President Bush are the root of all evil in the world" diatribe for when you have some modicum of accuracy.

Do you remember the meetings Bush had with all his right wing buddies in the oval office.Hannity et al were all there, Limbaugh slept in the Lincoln Bedroom! Fox news, hannity ect are all scripted to praise the wingers and slam the lefties, to deny this is to be delusional!

4,000 was everywhere! That's the only news we've gotten about Iraq since it became obvious the surge was working.

The letter writer must not get out much. Her letter makes no sense to me.

To accuse the media of being controlled by Bush contrasts violently with how the media report on him, the Iraq war, and the death toll.

2004: "Bush is so dumb he can't even pronounce 'nuclear' correctly"

2008: "Bush is so smart he's managed to control the media without anyone finding out about it"

So one of you liberals tell me, is Bush smart or dumb? And if you say he's dumb, don't tell me he's figured out how to control the media. You can't have it both ways.

By the way, the 4,000th death was the lead on every major news channel and website that day (including Fox which you all love to hate).

The 4000 deaths were everywhere, where was the story about Hill's "mistake?" Find that on any major network. Then tell me that Bush controls the media, along with the black helicopters hovering over your house...and area 51...and sector 7...
its all conspiracies right!!!

Nobody's in the dark about Bush's IQ. Cheney and friends have run everything since Jan 20 2001; Bush is a sock puppet. 4,000 dead US soldiers, trillions wasted, 100s of thousands of Iraqis dead, and all Cheney can say is, "So? We got control of the oil pool, didn't we? My ExxonMobilHalliburton buddies are happy."

You have to look at these things from the proper prospective. Both the media, administration, and both parties are compromised. It's like two baseball teams that want to win the world series. Both teams have players using steroids but neither one willing to admit it lest they expose themselves as well.

So it is in politics. The agenda is to win influence while walking a fine line. There has to be a certain degree of cooperation. The corruption runs broad and deep throughout the whole spectrum of associated players.

Here is one example “… it would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government …” - David Rockefeller in Baden-Baden, Germany 1991, thanking major media for keeping secret for decades the movement of the prophetic one world government.

The MSM will never cut it's own throat for a story. They know there are players in the world series of life who can buy them.

If you think that Bush controls the media, you are wrong. Part of the equation explaining why you don't hear much about Iraq is the fact that we are winning. It is hard to call the President's policies wrong when they are working. If Iraq was in total turmoil, then we would never hear the end of it. However, since the Iraqi army is staring to take care of the country on its own, the media can't say much about it.

The original writer also has not been paying much attention to what news they did see/read. There have been small quantities of chemical weapons found and non-Iraqi born terrorists are the ones that are doing most of the fighting there.

Again, get all of the facts before writing. We all have opinions, but if you want me to come over to your way of thinking, give me facts to back up wht you say.

The 4000 was everywhere. The reason you don't read a lot about the war details anymore, is that its going much better than before, and that is not something the liberal media wants Americans to know.

God forbid we made progress, and did something good to make it all worth while.

Better to let the people think its all coming unglued, than to tell them the truth.

No president can control the media. The media controls the government.

Go read "The Terrorist Watch" by Ronald Kessler and see if you still think Bush is a dummy. Get some information that doesn't filter through the media first, and then make a judgment.

Bush (and Cheney) control the media like Chian Kai Shek controlled Mao after he fled China for Taiwan.

I saw coverage of the 4,000th death in Iraq splashed over the front page and website of every large newspaper I know. What on earth are you talking about?

I guess Bush was delighted when the New York Times published a story about Abu Graib fifty-five times on the front page and then covered the success of the surge on the back pages. Get real!

What is the rational for the Bush Administration prohibiting the filming of coffins coming home from Iraq?

Could that be some type of control of the media?

Also I am glad we are doing so good in Iraq and we are winning, that means we should be able to come home soon?

@ YouGoFirst...
Winning...could you explain that? What does "winning" in Iraq mean? How do we know when that happens? The success of the surge is like running a good play in football, except we shouldn't have been in the game in the first place.

Bush controlling the media?

Is THIS that "drive-by-media" that Rush Limbaugh whines about in every other sentence directed to his loyal legions of neocon loonies?

So... Did anyone do as Agki suggested and look back at how the media handled the lead-up to the war?

He is not smart enough to tie his own show? Come on the man has a team and they are running the US and managed to spend 600 billion dollars... it doesn't seem like such a pipe dream to me that the Bush administration (or any administration) would have some control on our media.

ALL THE PRESIDENT in recent history reguardless of party (Democrat or Republican) control the media.

You upset the current president and your access to the white house goes bye bye. No paper in their right mind would do that.

So what's the problem exactly?

I'm wondering why the looney-left media doesn't report on the traffic deaths in this country. They want to tout 4000 deaths in Iraq but at least that many are killed every few months in this country. Don't they count??

@GeeBee....I guess you'd rather the "game" be played out in this country. Oh, I'm sorry, you want to just "talk" with the terrorists and that will get them to stay there and not bother us.

Good grief!

If you don't like what you hear or don't hear on the news, just call it another right-wing conspiracy. Seems to work.

Susan, if you spent less time listening to NPR you would have known that all of the major TV news outlets reported it. You need to broaden yourself a little. NPR is just as much a propaganda outlet as say FOX News which reported the 4000 number. What are you doing anyway, a body count like Vietnam? Anyone that follows current events knows the approximate number.

I'm wondering why the looney rabid-right media doesn't want people to know the truth?
Rush O'Hannity is always telling them to "ignore the media!" "ignore the media!"

Welcome to Moscow.

It is this writer's opinion that rather than just the current administration manipulating the media through selective release of information, we have a media which refuses to do its job. This lack of scrutiny appears to be due to a number of reasons, notwithstanding a certain laziness on the part of the media.

The Bush administration has certainly used whatever means at its disposal to control what gets into the news (remember Valerie Plame?) and it keeps out (Cheney's secret meetings with energy executives prior to launching the Iraq War). The intimidation is palpable, and granted it occurs from both Democratic and Republican administrations. Perhaps the worst was with Nixon and his enemies list.

The question for the reader is: Do you want a media that does its job or a media that kowtows to whoever is currently in power? The White House Correspondents' Association annual dinner is evidence of how the media sells its soul for the benefit of rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful in this country.

With the abuses of personal rights by the Bush people through their domestic spying initiative, more media will be less willing to pursue stories that the administration wants to supress.

It's no wonder that Ron Paul got only 1% of the vote in Utah! When are you neo-con adherents finally wake up and smell the ......... postum? It's not just the Left who oppose the war. The Birch Society also is and was opposed to the war since it started. The government is DUTY-BOUND to obey the Constitution. But they have grossly violated it. We need another Andrew Jackson, who went after the real war mongers, the international Zionist Bankers!!! And, furthermore, both parties, Democrats as well as Republicans, are branches of the same rotten tree.

We wouldn't have an opposing view or even another view, were it not for the advent of right-wing radio. Do something for me and listen to talk radio, then listen to the nightly news and then, most of all, think about it!

The media rely's on interest in a subject for its stories. No interest, no story, not viable commercially. I know I personally have lost interest in the war after this long. I wouldnt be surprised if the nation as a whole has lost most interest as well. So why fill the paper with Iraq stories.

When an Iraq story is #1 on the most popular or most commented chart of DN then I'll admit to being wrong.

Reporters are sometimes caught between a rock and a hard place. In order to keep sources accessible, they have to cultivate them rather than antagonize them. If and when they make their source look bad, they're cut off. So they make these arrangements to keep some things off the record in return for the information they're seeking. But I agree they were playing it way too cozy during the run-up to the Iraq invasion. They compromised their integrity and refused to ask the hard questions.

Right-wing radio.
You mean Rush Limbaugh.
With Limbaugh's non-stop attack on "the drive-by media" (as he affectionately calls every news source but HIS), he has managed to create a wierd secret club-like atmosphere that a certain type of people adore and listen to every day, for three straight hours per day, 5 days a week. (I guess some types simply cannot get enough of this sort of thing)
There is a subculture that exists today. And it is a Rush Limbaugh America. Far, far right wing and very spooky in their "We are the only Americans" rhetoric.
No thanks. I'm still getting over the McCarty era with McCarthy's version of America.

The reason that the coverage in Iraq has dissappeared is simple. The surge is working! There are not near as many attacks or casualties to report on. Duh! Even George W. could figure that one out.

I didn't mean to generalize so much. There were some notable exceptions during the run-up to the invasion. Many of the ones who asked the hard questions and got it right were shunned and ostracized. Some even lost their jobs. You don't hear about many of them anymore because they broke the rules and told the truth.

Oh, Mike, that tired old diatribe again? The "fight them there so we won't have to fight them here" argument is as illogical as it is old. It's as if you're saying "gee, we showed those terrorists! 4,000 dead troops sure payed them back for the 3,000 they killed." Get real, man. If we'd spent half of the money we've spent in Iraq building up our domestic security, we'd never have to "play the game on our turf" anyway. Go back to Hannity and find a better excuse. Fighting over there simply means al Qaeda doesn't have to go as far to find Americans to kill.

Hey everybody!
Here's a swell idea.
Don't read the paper.
Don't watch the nightly news.
Don't listen to your friends or neighbors.
Only listen to Rush Limbaugh, as he has told us so many time to do.
We can't possibly go wrong if we do that.
Plus, I hear Rush is off his OxyContin so that should make the news all that more interesting.

"Only listen to Rush Limbaugh, as he has told us so many times to do."

Liar.

Wouldn't we hear MORE about the war if we were winning and not less? I never heard about the 4,000th death, but I've been watching Fox.

Bush fans never die- I think your anti-semitism has no place on this blog or elsewhere in rational thought. Go join up with Rev Wright, and speak to a crowd who spews hate just like you.

I have not heard a single coherent argument from any liberal on this page. All I hear is the constant Rush and Hannity controls Republicans nonsense, as well as the Bush is a war criminal talk. No one ever produces facts to support any of their arguments. The truth is that it does not take my genius level IQ to understand that the media has been biased towards liberals for years. It is illogical to think that the 90% of the media members that vote Democrat would be biased in favor of Republicans. I think if you believe that, you have been watching too much Keith Olbermann. He is further to the left than Rush is to the right.
These must be the same people who hear Glenn Beck's sarcasm, and think he is being serious about some of the things he says, which are obviously tongue-in-cheek.

To Teacher: I apologize if anything I said was hurtful. I certainly didn't mean to if I did. This comment board can be pretty rough and tumble, and isn't the place for people with thin skins. Very little that's said here is personal, it's just political posturing sometimes in an attempt to score a point. Please don't think we're mean, because I think most of us are decent people who just enjoy a robust debate.

Whichever administration is in office controls the information news people need, and the only way they can get the info is to gain the administration's confidence. Officials give the good stories to the reporters they like, and they give the cold shoulder to the ones they don't like. It was true when Democrats were in office, it's true when Republicans run the show. Reporters are often at the mercy of their sources, so the reporters have to "make friends" with them.