I'm not sure who you're referring to in particular, but I gather that Fox News figures prominently in there somewhere. I'll address only one part of your post -- the complaint about "appropriating the citizens airspace."

What you really seem to be contending is that television channels are "the citizens['] airspace" in the sense that their content should be regulated by the government: unpopular or "irresponsible" (in your view) opinions should be suppressed.

Despite the obvious free speech implications, the government used to do precisely this, on the rationale that television channels were a limited resource that needed to be "balanced" -- even here in NYC we used to get, at most, seven channels. Advances in technology have rendered this model obsolete, however. The average citizen now receives scores or hundreds of channels. Alternate modes of communication, including internet sites maintained by both print and television news organizations, as well as political blogs, raise the number of readily available sources of political information into the thousands.

(As an aside, I must say that the internet is THE greatest boon to freedom of expression ever invented. The proliferation of political sites on the internet, from the far left to the far right, brings this country back to its roots, where early in its history every nut case printed broadsides, pamphlets, etc. It is more possible now than ever before to locate political views of every persuasion.)

At all events, whether regulation of the content of television was ever justified, there can be no basis for it now. Subject only to traditional First Amendment limits (yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, libel, pornography, etc.), both traditional and cable channels should have the same rights to say what they want as newspapers (and you and I) have always had.

I may dislike and complain about the tripe that CBS news and The New York Times put out. It is my right to do so. You may dislike and complain about Fox News, and you too have that right. But all three likewise have the right to say what they want, and the government shouldn't censor them.

The answer to free speech is more free speech!

I love the Post! After all, the Gray Lady doesn't give you Page Six!

In all seriousness, Fox is a mixed bag. Some of it is ridiculous. On the other hand, I think the Britt Hume evening program is the best one-hour news program on television. I watch it every chance I get.

The big difference between Fox, on the one hand, and the other networks (CBS, CNN, et al.) and the big print media (NYT, Washington Post), on the other, is that Fox makes no bones about the fact that it is basically pro-administration -- although I've seen harsher overt criticism of certain administration policies on Fox than I have on CBS. The others pretend that they are "objective" and express outrage when anyone questions their impartiality, even though everyone knows it's not true.

I've been reading a good deal of history about pre-Civil War America over the past several months, and I much prefer the honesty of the press back then. Papers made no pretense that they were impartial. To the contrary, they touted the fact that they were pro-Jackson or pro-Whig or whatever. There was truth in advertising, the reader knew what he was getting and could factor that in when assessing the information he was receiving. Fox, by and large, and many internet sites represent a return to those roots, and I think that's a good thing.

As for the internet, it may be "fractionalized" in the sense that there are so many sites that it's hard to focus on any one. But I disagree to the extent you are suggesting that particular sites present only half-digested opinions and rants without reasoned analyses of the underlying facts and considerations. There certainly are many such sites (Democratic Underground being a prime example). But to pick our last topic (torture) by way of example, I've come across many, many lengthy discussions of the issue, pro and con, on the internet that discuss the topic in far greater depth than I've seen in any print publication, including the revered NYT.

Let the love begin!

• Legal Analysis of the NSA Program

Then, they hide behind free speech, 1st and 5th amendment.

• Orin Kerry Bio