In media we trust, or in government?

This critique of reel vs. real media was thought provoking.

I have been on the other side of media, so I do know the argument that is used to sideline 'real' news.

Media patrons cover and publish what sells, not what is right or should be reported.

News reports have given way to 'features'. With 18 news channels competing for eye-balls, the most popular story sells.

In a sense it reflects the attitude and preference of society. More people care about Sanjay Dutt than about an unknown soldier dying for his country.

BBC can afford to cover it, they are a serious channel, funded by the UK tax payers money. Their primary goal is not eyeballs (TRP's) but a mission to deliver the truth.

Tehelka in recent times has tried to do that with limited success.

I can understand if news channels make a conscious discussion to go with the popular story, what I do not comprehend, is how our government pretends to care more about our cricket team. National security and welfare of those providing us with that security should be a primary concern of our government. What business does our government have to debate over cricket, when they should be consoling the family of the deceased and in no small measure at least issue an award of valor.

Alas, media reflects the trend and demand of society and the government of the people does in some way reflect the mandate of the populace.

It's a sad sad day indeed. But there is hope, that a few avenues of media (Internet) has set a course of natural justice by emphasizing on what is right. A trickle at a time.