Bogus Gold

You know what I'd like to see more of in the press? Lack of curiosity. When a major public official says he has no connection to some crime or scandal I'd like them just to take his word. Heck, it would be even better if they didn't wait for such a denial. Just assume the best. People wouldn't have voted for a major politician unless he was a pretty stand up guy in the first place, right? Well... mostly. I mean you may get a few bad apples in the bunch, but they shouldn't affect the way reporters handle politicians in general.

Let's say, for example, a young politician without much of a record rockets to the top tier of a political party in a state riddled with corruption. A cynical business-as-usual reporter might start making inquiries, asking questions, and entertaining some of the very worst possible scenarios explaining his success.

Wouldn't it be a lot better to just believe in the exception proving the rule? It's not like every single politician is corrupt, so why not just let it go. Don't ask questions. Don't investigate. Just... move on to happier things.

After all, isn't that what a free press is for: disseminating comfortable disclaimers protecting the powerful so we can all sleep easier at night?

I'm glad some in the media are finally getting on board with this new style of journalism, rather than wallowing in the negative. Who would really benefit by a reporter getting all suspicious about the relation between something like this and this?

Happy media assumptions of squeaky clean political leaders emerging from apparently very corrupt political environments. That's change we can believe in!