Dear FRONTLINE,

As an Ariel investor, I was appalled by Mr. Charles Bobrinsky's views and by Ariel's critical role in the LA Times debacle. Many people have invested their money with Ariel based upon the apparently false notion that Ariel was an enlightened and progressive organization. Mr. Bobrinskoy has convinced me that that Ariel no longer deserves its reputation or my money. It's a shame that progressive investors can't do to Ariel and Tribune what the counrty radio stations did to the Dixie Chicks.

Greg Carr
Cornelius, NC

Dear FRONTLINE,

I continued to read our local paper (The Tennessean) until the liberal bias made me sick. Bias one of the big reasons papers are dying. This was practically ignored in your story, because you don't want to believe it.

Tom Massey
Franklin, TN

Dear FRONTLINE,

It was interesting to see the Naples Daily News included in this series, and the focus on "hyperlocalism." However, just as fascinating - I never read that newspaper even though I live in SW Florida. Never. I only read it if I specifically want to know something local, and for me, that's not very often. But, whenever I try to buy the NY Times at certain Starbucks, it's always sold out.

As a NYer, I still want to read the NY Times each day, and I have never gotten into the habit of buying a local paper. I have relatives here in Florida who also moved here from New York, and they retain the same habits I do in terms of newspaper buying - we all still buy the NY Times or read it daily on the web. Very rarely do we read a local newspaper. Once in a while we watch local tv news and that is more than enough local news for us.

We are very into the internet, and people into the net are basically living "locally" online in a much larger community than Naples, Florida.

SW Florida, USA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I lived in Los Angeles for many years, leaving in the mid eighties. As I moved around the country the one thing that I missed most was not being able to get the LA Times. Now retired and living in back in my home state of Ohio, I still miss the Times. I subscribe online, but I miss the presence of that big hulking mass of Sunday Times with Calender and Home magazine. But I always felt, and still do, that the LA Times was on a par with the New York Times and the Washington Post. Why shouldn't the West Coast be represented by a major paper on the national scene? Does Chicago feel eclipsed by Los Angeles? California as a trend setter in both culture and politics needs something like the LA Times out there for the rest of the country to see and understand what's coming at them in the coming year. Bring back the Chandlers!

Robert Webber
Fairfield , Ohio

Dear FRONTLINE,

It is ridiculous to see all of these American reporters and editors trying to argue against the complete distrust and resentment the average person has toward the mass media. And the media blames the Republicans, the educational system, and everything else but the barometric pressure in Borneo. Why is it so hard to understand that people do not like being lied to, talked down to, and manipulated as if they were idiots? The main reason the American newspapers and TV news are losing their audience is that they have smugly and arrogantly destroyed their credibility. Paying Katie Couric $1.25 million per month to read 4 minutes a night of left-wing indoctrination from a teleprompter? Are they out of their mind?! How could things have possibly gotten this bad? A person could not make this stuff up in their wildest dreams. Even when specific figures or statistics are quoted in the media, it is a sure bet that they have nothing to do with the truth, or what is actually going on. A person might as well go out of their way to seek the truth from an alcoholic used car salesman.

Escondido, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

Thanks for reporting the story behind the headlines. I'm listening intently. I wish more Americans were as well.

Minneapolis, MN

Dear FRONTLINE,

I would like to see Frontline add to this discussion how the press failed in its crirical, watchdog role abysmally in the preparation for the Iraq war. The press, especially the New York Times, either simply parroted the info. distributed from the administration or in some cases actually amplified that info with more incorrect information (Judith Miller and WMD). Where was the critical, check-and-balance role of the press in the preparation for the Iraq war?? Completely absent.

Mountain View, CA

FRONTLINE's editors respond:

There is a section in the INTERVIEWS area of this site that deals with the failures in reporting on Iraq's WMD. Scroll down the right column to read what some top observers/participants have to say.

Dear FRONTLINE,

James Risen of the NYT's couldn't have said it better when he explained that journalists' jobs are to tell true events of our day and let the people act on that information.

A couple of years ago I got so much heat from my fellow classmates for saying that op-ed run "news" stations just confuse and fail the society they are in charge of helping. The United States' government controlling the media is as intolerable as North Korea's propaganda machine. Yes, the truth is not fun, and finding it isn't easy. However, the mere thought that pure information can inspire is the best entertainment of all. My only advice to government officials and journalist is this "Secrets, secrets are no fun, unless they're shared by everyone."

Anne Freda
Inverness, IL

Dear FRONTLINE,

PBS spends 4 hours (quite an investment in prime time television) to further propagandize us all, using government dollars in part, on the secret evil war that the Bush administration is waging against the poor defenseless "fourth estate". Why am I not surprised at the irony of that? The media are a collection of for-profit businesses, excepting PBS, who have no special rights in our constitution that any ordinary citizen has. I have the right to free speech, but that in itself does not give me the right to aid and abet our enemies in time of war. I do not have the right to holler "fire" in a crowded theater. The NY Times has no special right to proclaim government secrets publicly, either, regardless of their source.

Oh, and by the way, why do the words "government secret" seem to hold an inherently dangerous and evil connotation for most people, while journalists' secret meetings and secret conversations are assumed to be sacrosanct and in our best interests? It's because we've been propagandized to that attitude since Watergate, the Pentagon Papers, and now, Frontline's "News War". My disgust and disdain for reporters and the media in general is deepened by this series.

Bakersfield, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

This is a very interesting and timely series, but it illustrates the difficulty that journalists sometimes have reporting about themselves.

Many of the journalists interviewed in the episodes used a kind of moral equivalency to justify protecting their sources, suggesting that protecting the confidentiality of sources is paramount, no matter whether the source is seeking to spread a lie or a truth.

Journalists have been granting confidentiality far too routinely of late, and more to benefit their own careers than the public interest. I suggest a fairly simple, common-sense principle against which journalists should weigh whether to offer confidentiality: If the publication of the information provided by the source has the potential to increase the accountability of government or those with power, then confidentiality should be granted. If, on the other hand, confidentiality serves to protect those in power from accountability - as was the case in the Plame affair - journalists should not promise confidentiality in the first place.

Rebecca Mayer
Alexandria, VA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I recently watched your episode on the assault on the press, which had a short segment on the BALCO scandal. I believe a whole episode could easily be devoted to BALCO and the nature of steroids in professional sports. Unfortunately, I believe your report on the reporters and their confidential source left out a crucial detail in the BALCO scandal.I believe the reporters in question were aiding and abetting an illegal attempt by the BALCO defense attorney to declare a mistrial. I believe that I am generally a supporter of the rights afforded to journalists to protect their sources, but this is different. These reporters are not the saints that the Frontline report makes them out to be. Moreover, the Justice Department was not making a mistake in compelling these reporters to testify. I hope that in subsequent airings of this program, Frontline will find it fit to correct the record and honestly depict the BALCO reporters with a more critical lens.

Elad Sharon
Atlanta, Georgia

FRONTLINE's editors respond:

The writer is not the only one who is critical of the reporters --see this Slate article www.slate.com/id/2160217/ -- in the wake of the surprise admission by Troy Ellerman, a defense attorney in the BALCO case, that he leaked the star athletes' secret grand jury testimony about their use of steroids. Ellerman agreed to plead guilty to four felony counts, including obstruction of justice, because after he leaked the testimony, he had filed a motion to dismiss the charges against his client on the grounds that the ensuing publicity made a fair trial impossible. The motion was not granted, and his client eventually pled guilty. Ellerman came forward on Feb. 14, 2007, just a few days before the broadcast of our "News War" program. With a documentary program like FRONTLINE, unlike a newspaper, it becomes more and more difficult to make changes to the program the closer you are to the air date. We were able to report in the documentary the fact that Ellerman had stepped forward and that it now appears that the San Francisco Chronicle reporters will not face jail. However, we still do not know exactly what the reporters and editors knew and when they knew it, nor do we know whether the reporters had more than one source. We would caution against premature judgments about whether the reporters' actions were right or wrong. In addition to the criticism noted above, others have written in support of what the reporters did. For example: www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/2007/022207APromise.html At the time we interviewed the reporters, and to this day, neither of them will discuss the particulars of the case. Just after Ellerman came forward and the criticism of the reporters surfaced, we asked them for a comment. Lance Williams sent us the following:"As we stated throughout this case, we cannot and will not answers questions related to confidential sources. We promised not to betray our sources, and we will keep our word. Assuredly, if the day comes when reporters cannot keep their promises, people who want the truth to be told will become more reticent to come forward. And, in the end, it is not journalism that will suffer, but rather the public access to important information."It should be noted that our broadcast report did present former Assistant U.S. Attorney, Randall Eliason eliason.html, who explained why secrecy is so important in grand jury testimony. If you read the outtakes of his interview, which we have published on our Web site, you will see that he raises the possibility that, from the prosecutor's perspective, more was involved than simply a grand jury leak to justify subpoenas to the Chronicle and its reporters. His comments to us were made before Ellerman came forward. FRONTLINE is planning to monitor the continuing developments in the BALCO story and to post updates on our Web site. If the broadcast is repeated in a future season, we will revise the BALCO segment to take into account the dispute over how the reporters interacted with their sources.

Dear FRONTLINE,

Thanks for the excellent series. One of the consequences of this tumultuous period in American journalism that I believe we'll see is a shortage, 10-15 years down the road, of experienced young journalists who've stayed with the profession.

I'm six months into my first job as a reporter at a group of suburban community newspapers, and frankly, working and watching this series makes me want to quit and go back to grad school for a PhD, with which I might eventually have a chance to write about something important. I'm not alone: Almost none of the most talented editors from my college paper (The UCSD Guardian) are staying with journalism -- they're all going for law degrees or PhDs.

It's not hard to see why: Dailies all over the country are closing their Washington bureaus and their foreign bureaus -- which leaves young journalists like me wondering why they bother writing about school boards and city councils. The jobs we aspire to are disappearing! Community journalism may be going strong, but it's disheartening to see 30- and 40-something reporters for the major San Diego daily covering the same local trifles I do. It doesn't take a wordly mind to understand a planning dispute. If journalism doesn't offer jobs for the many talented writers and thinkers of upcoming generations, it's not going to get them.

Ian Port
San Diego, California

Dear FRONTLINE,

After reviewing Part 1 online (thank you, Frontline, for making that available - it helps with my fact-checking!), it is clear that the focus in that segment was on the wrong issue.

It really does not matter where the reporter gets his or her information, IF THAT INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN PUBLISHED.

The real crux of the matter is who makes the decision to publish, and what motivates that decision? The for-profit press has a long-established tradition of irresponsible publishing, in order to increase sales. A recent example was the erroneous Koran-flushing story. Time magazine sold many thousands of extra copies, while several Pakistanis died as a result. And the magazine faced absolutely no consequences.

When the for-profit press chooses to publish information that endangers lives, that action should be judged a form of assault. The publication should then be fined heavily, because money was their original motive. If they lose money by publishing compromising information, they will think twice about doing so.

Thank you, Frontline, for attempting to illuminate some rather dark corners of American life.

Peter Lawton
Monterey, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

As a photojournalist for one of the local corporate media affiliate and I will say that you have just scratched the surface of what I call the true axis of evil. Thank you for doing this brave work. Do you know why my local PBS is only showing the next episode @ 3AM? Are you aware of any pattern of censorship anywhere else?

Jorge Serrano
Miami, FL

Dear FRONTLINE,

I think all the rhetoric about leaks being a threat to national security is somewhat of a red herring. The real issue, & I don't think this was emphasized enough in the program, is that what the gov't. is doing is illegal! Namely, wire-tapping without a warrant.

Most of the interviewees were never asked directly what they thought about this or were allowed to skirt around the issue. If I were a reporter with this info & had to weigh a possible minor threat to national security against revealing illegal gov't. activities, I would certainly have come down in favor of the latter. I would love to know how much really valuable intelligence this program has garnered. I'll bet not much, if any. After all,if I were plotting against the US I certainly wouldn't advertise it on the Internet!

James Venuto
Kennett Sq., Pa.