I know that Fox News is usually considered the "good guys" but where are their numbers here?  I'm completely repulsed by the constant and continuing coverage of MJ, and Fox is guilty like the rest.  No one should get off easy.

I was appalled last night when Bill O'Reilly seemed to defend the grotesque overcoverage of death of Michael Jackson, even to the point of dismissing Gretchen Carlson when she said that "Cap and Trade" was passed in the House with little coverage while the media focussed almost entirely on Jackson. He actually (condescendingly) lectured her that there was plenty of time later for the media to cover "cap and trade" and nationalized healthcare after "this week". At first I thought he was being sarcastic or having fun with her, but from the incredulous expression on her face, I think she took him seriously. She even squeezed in her disapproval of what he said at the end of the segment. I think O'Reilly can't get away from his tabloid "Inside Edition" (?) days.

The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.

this is not 'liberal media bias'-- Fox News is all over this as much as all the other networks - IN FACT, about the only place we haven't seen 24/7 coverage this last week is... what for it..... PBS!!

Brent is wrong.  There IS a justification, it's just not a justification that works for normal people who have standards and morals.

There is no Republican president to bash, no military objective to oppose (now that their boy is at the helm) and no political benefit to their amoral socialist agenda.

That they covered it at all is curious.

"This is a prime example of why network television news audiences are disappearing before our eyes."

Not really. News numbers across the board have been boosted by the coverage of Michael Jackson's death, and whether we like it or not, it is big news. They're just giving people what they want. 

Do I wish they were covering cap/trade, and national health care more? Sure, but would it matter.....does the public really care about those things? They SHOULD, but, like most things political,  I'm guessing they aren't interested. They're too busy checking out Michael Jackson coverage to be bothered by these trivial issues.

Network news numbers may be dwindling overall, but this isn't why.

What is it with us; do we have to bemoan every misstep made by the MSM?  When has it ever made them take stock and alter their course?  Do you think they care about what MRC thinks?  Fox is hailed as the right's response to the Major Networks, yet, they are as egregious in their broadcast of nonsense as any of them.  Forget the Michael Jackson drama, what about the dumb ass car chases, the fascination with murder of women, and their relentless programming changes - removing the Beltway Boys for starters.  More and more they're into the tabloid crap.  And don't even get me started on Geraldo and Shep - why haven't they visited the families of the soldiers for their stories?  Sorry, they're busy w/Michael.  And speaking of the brave young soldiers killed this past week (may they all rest in peace), rather than bemoan the insensitve ignorance of the main stream media, better we make it a point to honor them w/a  column or two, or encourage Fox to highlight their lives - yelling at the MSM is a total waste of time.

I was praying we wouldn't have a nuclear attack or anything this afternoon because all the news networks were covering the memorial, commercial free.  Had we had any kind of emergency I doubt any of them would have interrupted their broadcast.

Next up on the MJ story list:

-drug test results from the autopsy; they take a few days longer than the physical autopsy.
-custody fight over the children.
-court battles over estate properties; much of MJ's estate consist of items that are the definition of illiquid, and many of them already have mortgages on them; ie Beatles book, Neverland, new unpublished songs, etc. Establishing values very difficult.
-investigations of doctors and other medical providers; may be criminal. Lots of controversial testimony to come.

It was just five years ago in June that Ronald Reagan died. Here's the Wikipedia article link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_and_state_funeral_of_Ronald_Reagan

I may have been a teenager when I was watching it, but I do remember the wall-to-wall coverage of Reagan's funeral, his motorcade throughout the day. Yet, we had fighting men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan at the time as well, and on the day of Reagan's funeral (or should I say five days of funeral, as his casket was presented at the capitol rotunda for 36 hours), the following things occured (again, courtesy of Wikipedia:)

Afghanistan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_in_Afghanistan#June): 

"Monday, June 7 - A U.S. soldier was killed and two others wounded after their vehicle hit a landmine in southeastern Afghanistan. They were taken to Kandahar airfield hospital where the one soldier died.

Tuesday, June 8 - U.S.-led coalition and Afghan forces completed a week-long operation in the Daychopan District ofZabul Province,Afghanistan. Through the course of the operation, 73 rebel fighters were killed and 13 captured. Six Afghan government forces and four coalition soldiers were wounded, and none killed.

• Afghan interim president Hamid Karzai began a week-long visit to the United States. His first appearance was at Fort Drum, New York.

Wednesday, June 9 - Eleven Chinese aid workers from Jiangxi province were killed in their compound by a score of armed men in Kunduz, Afghanistan, and another six were wounded. Taliban spokesman Abdul Latif Hakimi stated the Taliban were not involved.

• U.S.-led coalition troops swept portions of Uruzgan Province, Afghanistan, capturing a score of insurgents and killing eight.
• Afghan interim president Hamid Karzai attends the G-8 Summit in Sea Island, Georgia.

Thursday, June 10 - In Kunduz Province, Afghanistan, police chief Mutaleb Beg announced that two suspects were detained in connection with the previous day's massacre of Chinese aid workers.

• In the Bak District of Khost Province, Afghanistan, a U.S. encountered three roadside bombs; one discharged. There were no casualties.

Friday, June 11 - In southeast Afghanistan, eleven rockets were fired at a U.N. convoy carrying government officials.

• During his visit to the U.S., Afghan interim president Hamid Karzai scrubbed his planned weekend visit to the Afghani community in California and began his visit to Washington by representing Afghanistan at the state funeral of former U.S. president Ronald Reagan. This marked the first time an Afghani head of state or government had ever attended a funeral of an American president."

 And let's not forget that we were fighting the War in Iraq as well at the time, but I'm having trouble pulling up the pdf files on the reported casualties that occured during the days of mourning for Presiddent Reagan, so I decided to just stick to the point here about the military deaths in Afghanistan. This will happen regardless if the media is mourning Ronald Reagan or Michael Jackson. The only difference is that you think Reagan is God and Jackson is the Devil. I don't see thing in such a twisted way. They were both mortal men who had to deal with the fact that they are mortal, nothing more and nothing less. 

I'm sure I'll raise some hackles here, but writing as a vet, I disagree with this modern concept that we have to treat the death of every soldier like a national day of mourning!  So seven soldiers died in Afghanistan... that's why they call it a war!  We lost 45,000 soldiers on D-Day and shortly after... should the media of the day taken extensive time to recognize each and every one of them?

Rush Limbaugh often discusses "White Guilt" as an explanation of why so many whites are falling all over themselves to be nice to blacks.  I think there is also "Civilian Guilt", which I attribute to so many people feeling guilty for never serving their country, so they think fawning over every soldier's death will make them feel better.

Those of us who did serve, or are serving, don't need extensive media coverage of the deaths of our fellow servicemen.  Most of us would be happy with a simple "thank you" when we come home.  And if the media wants to devote extensive time to shower glory and fame on a dead singer, let them.  Most of us in uniform aren't serving so we can be showered with fame and hoopla, so please leave that nonsense to the celebrities.