The "news" this morning was that President Bush was thinking about knocking off Saddam Hussein before 9/11/01. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill is saying that.
I cannot believe it. How is that news? What is new about it?
Readers of "Bush at War," by Bob Woodward, published only months after 9/11, read it there. Readers of newsmagines like Time, Newsweek and US News know it. Ditto, the readers of monthlies like Harper's, Atlantic and Washington Monthly.
In fact, the "get Hussein" policy has been the subject of countless stories in the daily press.
Heck, while not exactly boasting of it, the Administration hasn't exactly denied it.
So why do the papers and networks treat it as news?
First, the publishers of Paul O'Neill's book want it that way to sell books. Secondly, 60 Minutes wants it that way so people will tune in to their interview with O'Neill tonight.
(Need I add that what news organizations pass along is mostly messages from authorities and other salespeople?)
Secondly, we have a disorganized press.
That's good; you will find "organized" journalism only in authoritarian states.
The downside, however, is that American news mediums have no mechanism for coordination. No way to agree that "The Bush Adminisration wanted a war with Iraq before 9/11" is not only true, but old.
PS In fairness, O'Neill's plain words on the subject deserve some attention. I just wish they wouldn't call it "news."