1. On the challenge from bloggers: The "platform" - print, TV, Internet, telepathy, whatever - will change, but the public hunger for reliable information will grow. Blogs will compete with op-ed columns for "views you can use," and the best will morph out of the pajama game to deliver serious analysis and fresh information, someday prospering with ads and subscriptions. The prospect of profit will bring bloggers in from the meanstream to the mainstream center of comment and local news coverage.
Translation: Once those little brats grow up, they'll be JUST LIKE US!! Really!
On national or global events, however, the news consumer needs trained reporters on the scene to transmit facts and trustworthy editors to judge significance.
So.....why don't you hire some?
In crises, the Cartoon network ESPN the Oprah Winfrey show large media gathering-places are needed to respond to a need for national community.

2. On resentment of media elitism by awakened cultural and religious voices: They're not crazies. Their opinions on stem cells and same-sex marriage are newsworthy and not an assault on church-state separation. Protests at "wardrobe malfunction" and campaigns against state-sponsored gambling are neither bluenosed nor repressive. But there is no need for sensible seculars in mainstream media to feel an urgent call to get right with religion. It's O.K. to say "Merry Christmas" at the end of a newscast without worrying about equal greeting for Ramadan and Hanukkah and Kwanzaa and all the rest.
You ignored Festivus, you $%#@-ing bastard!!

3. On judges jailing journalists for refusing to reveal sources: Mainstream media have good reason to be angry about being unfairly jumped on, and no reason to be depressed and docile for fear of seeming self-interested. If the press can't promise sources that we won't rat on them, coverage would cease to be inbred and repetitiverobust and uninhibited; government and corporate corruption would go unreported.
See our stellar reporting on Oil-for-Food, Palestinian Authority kleptocracy....
But why should mainstream media be alone in resisting this nationwide judicial assault on the people's right to know wrongdoing? Where is the legal profession, which should not only see danger in an unrestrained judiciary, but would be next in line to lose much of its own privilege of confidentiality with clients?
Hey journo boy....most judges ARE lawyers....it's called "professional courtesy".
Where are consumer groups, often reliant on whistleblower revelations in newspapers?
Nader's still out there....and how.
And where are the preachers who may be threatened with contempt of court for not testifying about penitents engaged in peculation?

4. On mainstream media's feeling that President Bush doesn't give a hoot about what we say or write: That's his loss more than ours. He may deliver an uplifting second Inaugural Address, but still does not appear thoughtful or adept at answering questions.
We're taking our bat and our ball and going home. Nyeah!
The reason: Bush holds quarterly, rather than the traditional monthly, news conferences. This lack of regular rehearsal gives those lucky bastards on the White House beat plenty of time to shop online costs him familiarity with issues, and costs his administration the discipline of deadlines for suggested answers. As the debates showed, Bush gets better with practice. He is not as good as he thinks he is when winging it.

5. On widespread suspicion of political bias in news coverage: Here's the good news:
Right again!!
Bad news is newsier than good news. Even when media try to be "fair and impartial," they can be expected to annoy rather than please the party in power. That's because clean government needs a snooping adversary, not a cheerleader; the Outs need help from the press to hold the Ins accountable. Today that media bias is undeniably liberal. That's natural when your profession is dominated by 60's dinosaurs who still relate EVERYTHING to Vietnam and Watergate conservatives are the Ins; five years ago, the bias often ran the other way.
Safire's SO funny!

And the way he says "it's natural" makes me think of an Allenist piously agreeing that dhimmis are naturally inferior...

As future elections near, that tilt must disappear from news pages to let the voters do the tilting. Some mainstreamers flopped on necessary election evenhandedness in 2004 and should be grimly thankful for a corrective kick in the teeth from other media, bloggers and righteous right-wingers.
And the voters....you know, the 51% who didn't vote the way you ordered them to?