The day before yesterday on CNN, Wolf Blitzer interviewed Hillary Clinton about her recent comments regarding Iran and Israel. Blitzer is a former lobbyist for AIPAC, a conservative pro-Israel group. I don't even care what was said, but it against all journalistic prinicpals for him to act as a journalistic asking a presidential candidate about Israel and the Middle East without acknowledging his former job as a neocon lobbyist for the same country.To expand a bit on the good doctor's take, I would add that conflicts of interest abound across the political landscape. It's not just Wolf Blitzer and CNN. It's multiple Supreme Court cases, not the least of which was Bush v. Gore, where Justices should obviously recuse themselves and they don't. Corporate tie ins drive coverage. Everything the Justice Department did during the last seven years smacks of conflicts of interest.
How many segments have we seen on a news channel where they're discussing a product owned by a company that owns that network? The invasion of Iraq was driven by so called journalists working for networks owned by military contractors. No disclaimers anywhere. All we ask is that we get a reasonable disclaimer, then go ahead an lie all you want.