"These three realities - the ignorance and personal bias of journalists; the failure of journalists to actually find stories; and their inaccuracy in reporting when they did - typified my experience with political journalism."
It seems to me that the author is asking to have his political opinion be respected while encouraging his readership to question the validity of other political opinions. That newspapers and political journalist ought to refrain from picking and choosing and report what the political parties or political leaders deem relevant and correct.
Newspapers have always been soapboxes for personal political speeches to influence that particular readership. X times was such and such and Y times was politically at war with B times and the only good paper was to read my times. If your political education and outlook is coming from any paper rather than local involement you don't deserve an opinion. It's not yours in the first place. Bloggs are not any different. People need to exercise discernment and investigate issues not learn to accept a political directive. If your reading a paper or joining bloggs for purposes of agreement you will not learn anything new or be challenged in any significant way.

A bit of light relief - I speculated that maybe the ACTU and some fellow travellers could get together with say The UK Guardian and launch an alternative news website in Australia.

A daily news source that was pro union, pro environment, etc etc.

Set up now, within a few years I think a majority of people will be sourcing their news from the web and we could have some balanced alternatives.

Dear Western Red....
a news media 'pro-union' ? good grief. There is already the Fairfax mob, and by Pro-union do you mean 'anti' business ?
Sounds just a tad like THEM/US on steroids.

Would it not be more preferable for all of us, employers and employees to work together for a better and sustainable Australia in terms of jobs ?

UNIONS.. ok..lets look at the myth and the reality.

1/ THE MYTH. Labor unions are meant to function as a barrier to exploitation, to give a collective voice to organized worker groups, and to seek improvements to pay and conditions.

2/ THE REALITY. Socialist leaning people, who have as their primary goal the establishment of a socialist utopia where income and land is re-distributed etc. stand as candidates for union executives and promise not 'better' pay and conditions but UNSUSTAINABLE pay and conditions. i.e. they pander to the pure greed factor in workers.
Builders laborers is a classic example. When a bloke who just has to pick this up, and put it there etc.. push a barrow around and general laboring duties gets paid sooo much more than say a teacher....there is a bad prawn at the barbeque mate.
Organizing is often by intimidation. One of the 'organizers' goes to my gym and he is very HUGE. Johnson tiles is just near me. Craig whatshisface did time over that criminal attack.
Now..what have they given us ? Hundreds and hundreds of workers each month losing their jobs to where ? wellll we know that answer don't we...to China etc.
IF...the unions want to keep those precious pay and conditions they need to target the RIGHT place and that is CHINA and its slavery.
I'm an employer and if I hear of a demo/protest at the Chinese embassy I'll be right there with the workers.

Your right but most people dont want to know they have been brainwashed into a certain thing.

The media doesnt help whatso ever, they take the point that 2 partys are there nobody else.

They should project the news what is happening out there which doest happen.

Like myself with the Australian peoples Party even though not registered they take it as a joke.

I find this pretty bad as people say they have no real choice and then ask me why they havnt heard about this, well not interested and doest run with their agenda.

We are stuck with what we have until people make that choice to hear the truth which many dislike as they hope their lives will just carry on without any real change and just put up with it.

so if we dont do anything then we are just at fault as they are for not trying to change this media agenda

Very discerning thesis again Peter, helping us middle roaders to pluck up enough courage to use reason about current world problems rather than to rely completely on faith in either media or our politicos.

Reason enough even to have faith in the Guardian which portrays letters and discussions from three global quarters, Britain, France, and the US?

It was the Guardian years back which prompted questions about what happened to Saddam’s so-called 300, 000 topline troops, whether they were all shot, just let go, or whether historically, if paid enough, were more likely to accept positions and be relied on in the US forces than the Shias?

There have been guarded reports through SBS Dateline, that Paul Bremer had made suggestions about the Sunni military being conveniently used by the Americans, but the question is, why was not this critical political argument ever taken up by our media?.

From those of us who were against the illegal attack on Iraq, it could be said, to Bush, Blair and Howard, well and bloody good and serve you right, that most of Saddam’s soldiers could now be the Sunni suicide terrorists creating such mayhem in Iraq?

But really under the theorem of ethical reasoning. with the bloodshed that has been caused over the years between the Sunnis and the Shias we should have not wanted it that way. When it all boils down the hundreds of thousands of citizens killed in those years will have been such a loss to a future democratic Iraq if it ever happens.

There was mention from one of of GWB’ crew the other day, that it looks like the Iraqi problem might have to be left to the historians. Well now, as all official historians must be graduates from Uni’ Schools of Humanities, and who are also often called left-wing loonies or fruitcakes by many of our contributors, one wonders what a genuine media will make of it all in the finish?

Going by what has been left out in the recent story of Iraq, a genuine media could be hard to find?

Good article Peter, and good term Chainsmoker - "Opinionators".

Years ago my father noted that most of the news was really just commentary on the news, and not the actual facts.

I too, often get the feeling that the journalist is trying to sway me to one side or the other, rather than impartially deliver the bare facts.

Also, bravo to Online Opinion - you really fill a void. Thankyou.