If the press is doing its job, those high up in government should always be a bit uneasy because journalists should be asking some uncomfortable questions -- and sometimes coming up with answers that are equally uncomfortable.

I'd like to see a bit of introspection and navel-gazing from our mainstream media. I'd like viewers to chime in as wel. It may not be as important a conversation as the political discussion over gun control laws, but it is ultimately an easier problem to fix.

Me, I just want news I can trust. Sure, I'm not in the news industry, and have no idea how to fix the problem. However, maybe we can get a good start regarding what might be the worst of ethical abuses.

I probably know CNN's history as well as anybody and I recall with regret two other incidents where CNN failed to meet the standards of responsible journalism.

The allure and thrill of the unknown ending in an over-scripted world and the visceral encounter with the unaltered has left us drunk and horny on communal media peep shows.

It is good that the New York Times has a "Public Editor" to keep an eye on the paper's ethics. But sometimes, it seems like valuable column space is wasted chastising Times staffers for minor missteps.

Anyone in the media talking about raising income tax rates on the top two income brackets should disclose their possible conflict of interest. "Full disclosure, I fall into the top tax bracket myself, so I would personally be affected by changing this rate."

What I want to do here is to give anyone dealing with unethical journalists an invaluable tool that can be used, now, for mitigating damage.

Usually, journalists accept polls without pausing to think about whether they reflect reality or not. Last week, the media world was treated to an incredibly rare event: a journalist met a poll he didn't like.

The mainstream media, including the New York Times, played a pivotal role in ACORN's demise through shoddy, opportunistic journalism. But all have refused to acknowledge their role.

We've seen this pattern before. A non-sourced, anonymous story enters the right-wing blogosphere and gets picked up by mainstream media, allowing the right to stovepipe their insanity.

Brands are ditching advertising, which is really pretty transparent in its intentions, in favor of spin and PR, which really is not. This shift is partly because advertising is failing and partly because PR is right for the times.

In the age of Television Payola, regular "news" contributors never have to choose between television time and corporate shilling -- the shills get the best of both while the audience loses.

Could the Times possibly have assigned the photographer to take a picture of minors engaging in what seems like incredibly risky behavior?

In the months after we found out about the kidnapping, I witnessed the most amazing press blackout on a major event that I have ever seen. I wonder how strongly this non-reporting will be criticized in the weeks to come.