On news press importance

Fox News reporter Ed Henry interrupted a recent Hillary Clinton Iowa campaign event. Would she take press questions?

“Maybe, when I finish talking to the people here," Clinton purred condescendingly, referring to her handpicked fawners. She preened,  a regal smirk curling her mouth. "I'll have to think about it...I will put it on my list for due consideration." She mimed note taking. 

One thought of an amused tabby toying with a desperate mouse. Her every sentence was punctuated by appreciative giggles from what patriotpost.us termed Clinton's "planted sycophants." Clinton seemed emboldened by her subjects' hostility to the concept of informed, not necessarily sympathetic reporters questioning their chosen one. And they applauded her evasion. 

Now, I understand much popular press antipathy is robotically partisan in nature. Whereas some assail Fox News as "Faux News" and illegitimate, their ideological counterparts rail against the "Clinton News Network" and "MSDNC" as being of similarly dubious integrity. 

All share the conceit that only reporting that reflects their own prejudices is "real journalism." Of course, a message's accuracy does not turn on the messenger's identity.

By challenging officials, members of the press represent the public interest. Politicians and supporters who would stifle robust scrutiny are disserving voters who require essential information, and the proper functioning of the electoral process, itself.