To the media I ask this question: Name one presidential candidate in recent history who had not sat down for any Sunday talk shows or non-Fox related cable news shows less than six months out from a presidential election? Name me one!
But in today's highly politicized world the newspapers can't win: If they publish, they're called anti-American defeatists, yet if they don't publish they're complicit in a cover-up and tools of the Pentagon.
If journalism can't help save the world, then why in the world should the world care about saving journalism -- at least this kind of journalism? Prove that you are smart enough to be trusted with the shield of humanity that you say you deserve.
If teachers (or family, or media) don't ask questions, then usually children will stop asking as well -- and their natural curiosity and imagination, which are the stepping stones to skeptical thinking, become censored in the meantime.
Most journalism organizations have clear, blanket policies: Don't steal other people's work, don't serve on your school board when you're covering education, don't endorse presidential candidates. But rules for Twitter are murkier, if articulated at all.
Somewhere amongst the blob of partisan political analysis, reality television contests and mass commercialization that makes up our popular culture, is a world of politics that attempts to fit in. The problem is, real political discussion cannot exist in such a setting.
In the first couple of weeks following the Feb. 26 fatal shooting and Zimmerman's release after claiming self-defense under Florida's so-called "stand your ground" law, few Americans knew anything about it.
Instead of seeking remedies to this ongoing problem, the putative guardians of our democratic principles, rights and responsibilities -- the United States Supreme Court -- has chosen to vastly exacerbate the situation.