The LA Times tells its "bloggers" to ignore the story about John Edwards cheating on his cancer stricken wife and the illegitimate baby his mistress had by him.
(Hat tip to Mark Urbin)
What can I say?
Laws are enacted, both respectable and contemptible, because someone acts in a way that is harmful other persons.
The point of having a First Amendment was that the voters would be properly informed about their elected officials and those who were seeking public office. Instead we have an Established Media whose members have, on the basis of party affiliation, slandered a sitting president with very obviously forged documents and refused to report on the malignant behavior of a presidential candidate.
This is a gross and deliberate violation of the public trust. And while this would not necessarily bring about a repeal of the First Amendment it may cause some to interpret it in a manner that is less tolerant of the present forms of media malfeasance.
This could lead to further problems in the future.
What are your questions on this block of instruction?