This post contains a lot of opinion.  Please bear this in mind.

One of the things I’ve noticed in the past year or so is how biased the media in the United States is — particularly in favor of the image of the United States.

This isn’t to suggest it happens all the time.  Indeed, often, the United States media portrays our leaders more combative and aloof than they like actually are.  While no doubt, there’s combativeness and a major adversarial relationship in the Legislative branch of Government alone, the media often makes it out that this is the only relationship they have.

However, many examples of government-censorship seem apparent.  A Republican committee on the House Energy and Commerce committee released a report showing that the Obama Administration’s Department of Energy coerced Solyndra to hold off announcing major plans, including layoffs and other potentially embarrassing bits of information to avoid muddying the waters further in an already ugly midterm election; until after the said election.

The veracity of this report is questionable — as it could very well serve to be an example of bellicose and vehement partisan fighting that’s become common in the last decade; but the accusation alone is disturbing.

Another example that comes to mind specifically is Barbara Starr — CNN‘s Pentagon Correspondent.  When I hear her reports, often citing “unnamed sources,” or “an unnamed Pentagon official,” or someone who “declined to identify themselves,” are more and more being used.  To me, this sounds like a Department of Defense brief, being placed in her hands, and the DoD saying “Say this, citing “an unnamed Pentagon official.”  Should Barbara Starr change her title from “CNN Correspondent to the Pentagon” to “The Pentagon Correspondent to CNN?”   This is only one example of reporters from the Pentagon I’m singling out.  She’s not the only one who does this.

In the year since I took Dr. Victor‘s International Business class, I’ve learned to trust other sources other than just domestic media for information on the Government, and America itself in the terms of the Media.  The Economist, Deutsche Welle and BBC being the top three.

What does this say about the state of our media?  Is this just the accepted new normal, or the beginning of something else?