It's my opinion that journalism has an obligation to report information that the public needs to know. That "need to know" is always the center of conflict for many journalists. What does the public need to know from the story. Now, my girlfriend is a former reporter. She worked for big media outlets and for some small town newspapers. She always makes a strong point to distinguish between journalism and media. Journalism publishes a story, and that story is important for the public to know. Media publishes anything and everything that will make them money. Big difference (she also holds magazines like Newsweek and Time to a lower standard than pretty much any newspapers: "Well of course Newsweek fucked up the Koran flushing story. Newsweek's a fucking magazine."
When I finally got around to asking her about the Valerie Plame story that is sweeping the blogs, she rolled her eyes, took and deep breath, and said something I have not heard anyone here (or anywhere else) say: "Why did the public need to know Valerie Plame was an undercover CIA agent? And why did Bob Novak's editors run the story with her name in it?"
