Yesterday I took on the stupid "objectity" that encourages journalists to "give both sides" and ignore the question of truth.
In fairness to reporters, the truth may be elusive or there may be insufficient time to find it.
In the story I used, however, about Karl Rove's attack on liberals, the truth was easily established. And failure to do so in close proximity to Rove's charges is terrible journalism.
Incidentally, I have been thinking about why Rove said what he said and I have decided he probably chose his words carefully. For their essence is that they paper over the huge gap between the 9/11 terrorists on one hand, and the Bush war on Iraq, on the other.
Conflating those two disparate subjects into a fictitious "War on Terrorism" has been the strategy of the White House from the beginning. A successful strategy, too.