Should one -- moi, specifically, a journalist -- upvote the approved anti-narrative? In terms of making a modest living, I don't see much middle ground. Both s

Should one -- moi, specifically, a journalist -- upvote the approved anti-narrative? In terms of making a modest living, I don't see much middle ground. Both sell newspapers/pageviews. There's all the room in the world between approved objectivity and calculated dissent. It just don't pay. The recently butchered James Foley said he'd cover local planning commission meetings if that was his last professional option. Idealist? Chump? Who else is going to do it, and do it well -- who informs the polis, so that a half-ass democracy can at least pretend to function? Crowd-sourced event coverage is cheap and easy and sexy. But it doesn't provide context. Sadly, for-profit media seems determined to capitalize on free YouTube and Twitter feeds at the expense of paying professionals to pay attention and make sense of complex issues. Nothing new here. Move along. News at 11. Did I say that out loud? Again? (Edit: I'm also a big fan of The Dish View From Your Window Contest, which leads this discussion. Interesting media model at The Dish: curate/create great content/commentary, and ask readers to pay. So far, so good.)