SL Solow,
I think there's a substantial difference in what the framers of the constitution had in mind, the current environment, and the unbridled power of the media today.
If a Jan Stephenson wants to make a comment, irrespective of its merit or lack of merit, she is free to do so.
And, if you want to make counter comments, irrespective of their merit or lack of merit, you are free to do so.
The problem is that neither of you, as individuals, have much of a voice, or perhaps, more importantly, much of an audience.
The media, the medium through which the vast majority of information is distributed, has a powerful voice, and a huge audience, and can print or say pretty much whatever they want, without fear of contradiction or repercussions.
And thus, a great imbalance has occured.
You can mess with a bee, a wasp or a hornet, but you learn at an early age not to mess with a nest, that's too powerful and dangerous of an organization for any prudent person to take on.
And so it is with the media.
Gone, is the independent, healthy "arms length" distance seperating participants from observers.
My concerns relate to their active, not passive or neutral role.