…Katie Couric’s annual salary is more than the entire annual budgets of NPR’s Morning Edition and All Things Considered combined. Couric’s salary comes to an estimated $15 million a year; NPR spends $6 million a year on its morning show and $5 million on its afternoon one.

And further down, a solid point:

What’s striking is how little notice this received in the flood of coverage of Sawyer’s appointment. With the notable exception of Jack Shafer in Slate, who cheekily urged Sawyer to turn down the job “and persuade ABC News to divert the millions it ordinarily pays its anchor and spend it on 50 or 80 additional reporters to break stories,”

So perhaps it’s a myth that good journalism has to be expensive.

There is one thing I have not missed from the affluent life: television;  more specifically, cable news. Here are two examples:

CNN’s coverage of Barney Frank’s town hall meeting:

and Fox’s coverage:

Who to trust? Neither. Turn off the TV and pick up a newspaper. Then give it to me so I can use it as insulation when the winter comes.

Now regard the following video:

It’s shocking how many times Colbert is cut into Taitz’s conversations. It’s not just basic interruption, a good ear would catch that most of her words have been edited out so that the only voice is Stephen’s. Sure it’s satire, but to invite someone on and make them a foil by post-production is disgusting and cheap. I thought better of you, Colbert. You don’t win arguments by erecting a straw man.

Aside from being updated only four times in two months (!), the site is woefully underwhelming. The newest innovation? A photo mosaic of Destiny’s Child made completely out of thousands of pictures of other celebrities. Both the subject and the technological method are over a decade old.

Next on the list is an obnoxious flash application about iPhone “killer apps” that doesn’t fit on the screen, is hardly navigable, and which forces you to watch commercials. No, thanks.

After that is a 360 panorama from Venice. Again, late-90s stuff here.

I have been trying to believe this is some sort of April Fool’s joke that won’t die, but sure enough the “innovation” blog is still linked to on the front page of the Post’s website. Who the hell on their web dev team came up with these ideas? Creating blurry pictures of celebrities and obnoxious flash interfaces are not going to save newspaper journalism. In fact, it just drives away serious users and seriously damages the credibility of a once-venerable institution.

Update: Seems the Post “accidentally” tried to sell access to its reporters and to Obama administration officials. Now that’s innovation.

The Guardian newspaper was the sole company to publicly apologize for publishing the completely false information. Other news agencies have either ignored the error, quietly corrected it, or simply blamed Fitzgerald outright. Most deliciously, Wikipedia editors had removed the quote within an hour because it could not be verified.

And news companies wonder why people are losing faith in their product.

What he has shown — and it is an important accomplishment in itself — is a mastery of the art of managing the presidency.

Trans: Obama hasn’t screwed up yet. Yes, this is a major feat.

And it is surprising, because there was no reason to assume that he had the skills to direct such a large enterprise.

Trans: We were expecting a shite-show considering his complete lack of executive experience.

Obama had a few stumbles in assembling his Cabinet and, as a result, lost the services of one potential major asset, Tom Daschle, his original choice to manage his health-care initiative.

Trans: Sure, six known tax cheaters seem like a lot, but isn’t it better to keep people above the law if they follow your political agenda?

Hardly a day has gone by in the first three months that Americans have not seen Obama on their TV screens in a variety of roles — chiefly as economic salvage director for seriously shattered housing, credit and employment systems.

Trans: Nope, we’re not sick of showing him on the TV yet.

But they’ve also seen him as commander in chief of armed forces fighting two wars, diplomatic traveler engaged with world leaders, and agenda-setter for Congress — to say nothing of first father, first fan, first consort of Michelle and first master of Bo.

Trans: “Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.”

But the overture has gone well, and so far, the cast seems to know its parts.

Trans: I’ve memorized my lines, now where’s my appointment?

This whole charade of discussion is disgusting and has brought out the worst of both sides; mainly from the Republicans, who have shown extreme weakness and disorganization in making a stand. After a few whiney calls to fairness, they have tentatively agreed to a slightly-less-than-$800 billion spending bill. They have shown the requisite opposition to it and are trying to wash their hands of the deal, but not too much in case it actually works. House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said in a statement right after the announcement on Friday, “ultimately this bill should be judged on whether it works, and 90 percent of a bad idea is still a bad idea.”

So he thinks 90% of it is wasteful spending and pork, but he is willing to try a wait-and-see approach to it? Is this really the kind of leadership we’re going to get out of the opposition in the next four to eight years?

What is most disturbing is that none of the major networks or major pundits have clearly broken down and laid out the components of this bill. Conservative critics scream it’s mostly waste which won’t help anybody, while Liberal cheerleaders degrade the Republicans as Neros who would rather play fiddle than put out the fire. The less-biased reporters ignore the thoughtful approach, instead calling the blows to each side as if they were ringside at a Holyfield fight. Whatever happened to “we report, you decide?”

Of course the Democrats are going to produce a bill chock full of government-expanding programs. Since most of America voted for them that’s what we are going to get. And who is blames them? That’s their platform and they’re sticking to it. But arguing over what money goes where is wasted breath.

There is a more insidious problem here that is overlooked by nearly every media organization (except the Wall Street Journal). Whether the bill is filled with pork or not is a moot point. No matter what form a giant stimulus package takes, be it infrastructure overhaul, massive education spending, or stimulus checks, we are going to severely increase inflation.

When you dump trillions of fabricated dollars in the economy, inflation will rise. There is no escaping it. With the ridiculously poor returns on investments and bank accounts, the last thing we need is our current cash supply to decrease in value. What good is “saving or creating” 2.5 million jobs when their salaries are paid in a worthless currency?

And yes, “borrowing from our grandchildren” is a euphemism for printing money. And we all know how that worked for the Weimar Republic. From Wikipedia:

Since striking workers were paid benefits by the state, much additional currency was printed, fueling a period of hyperinflation. The 1920s German inflation started when Germany had no goods with which to trade. The government printed money to deal with the crisis; this allowed Germany to pay war loans and reparations with worthless marks and helped formerly great industrialists to pay back their own loans. This also led to pay raises for workers and for businessmen who wanted to profit from it. Circulation of money rocketed, and soon the Germans discovered their money was worthless.

Sound familiar?

So the next time you listen to your favorite commentator, see if he mentions inflation. He will not. While everyone is ogling the familiar kabuki play on the floors of the House and the Senate, we are implicitly agreeing that the only way to get ourselves out of this self-made debt hole is to borrow and spend more. Pure lunacy.

According to the Examiner’s editor in charge of programming the day’s edition, “this is an experiment. … We’re not in it to make money. We’re probably not going to lose a lot, but we’re not going to make much either.” Well, they get points for being half right. I would give anything to read their report on the experiment.

Funny enough, at some point we’ll revert back to hand-held copies if e-paper ever lives up to the hype.

The last line is the saddest. Here’s the video:

From the article:

But this month, returning to his former home as president-elect, Obama has gone from Hawaii’s tourist in chief to its hermit in chief. He has been unusually private at the start of his 13-day holiday vacation, providing an early glimpse of what any tropical getaways during his presidency may be like.

The editorial staff considers this front-page news, folks.* Meanwhile, Pakistan is amassing thousands of troops on the Indian border in preparation for a possible war.**

*I know it seems I’m picking on the Post, but it’s verging on idolatry at this point.
**Does anyone else think it’s weird that I have to reference a foreign news source on this?