Recent coverage of the case of the anthrax tainted letters sent to senators and officials in 2001 has been baffling. When the story first broke, shortly after the attacks of September 11th, use of the word terrorism in connection to the case was widespread practise in the mainstream media. The so-called 'Amerithrax' case killed five people and injured seven others, and consisted of two waves of letters reading 'death to America, death to Isrel' and ending with the line 'Allah is great'.

I don't propose to answer this question myself, for fear of being either lynched by a baying mob of subs, or told to clear my desk by the men at the top...but here's a very interesting piece from the Independent on Sunday about London freesheet City AM's decision to axe its sub-editing staff.

For me the central issue is that raised by 'an insider':-

Despite Malik himself seeing the court's ruling of 26th June as a 'victory for common sense', I feel the decision to compel the controversial British journalist to hand over party of his interview notes for his forthcoming book on self-confessed former extremist Hassan Butt marks a dark day for press freedom.
 

I suppose when the former White House press secretary wants to write a piece for your newspaper you don't refuse if you know your business.

Nonetheless i can't really understand why the Washington Post are running this article, from Ari Fleischer.

The American Journalism Review has an interesting article about the ongoing decline of newspapers. One startling statistic about newspaper readership in the US: 30 years ago, 71% of American adults read a newspaper, 10 years ago, 59% and last year 48%.

The Daily Telegraph reported yesterday that bloggers are in favour of a universal code of conduct being drawn up to govern conduct online.
It's a measure that comes too late in my opinion, for the unofficial rules have already been written: there are none.

It is perhaps fitting that the last article i wrote for this website was about the relative security of the print format.

Just what are these newspapers thinking?

(USA) - My speculation last week that Fox had a clever plan to take over newspaper and local TV news, and grab local advertising revenues, got a big credibility boost today.

(USA) - Ron Berryman, who has responsibility for the online strategy of Fox's local TV affiliates, sure seems impatient these days waiting for his stations to create more original local content.  What could Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox be up to?  Hmmm.  Let's play out the next 5-15 years.  Local newspapers will have moved online, perhaps totally.  Web-based TV (IPTV) will have made local TV affiliates obsolete -- there no longer being a need for each metro area to have its o

As the story broke last night that Portuguese police were searching a house in connection with the disappearance of British toddle Madeleine McCann, i got a taste of how the rapidity of the news media

(USA) - Those who currently control news do not want to relinquish their power to citizens and the free market, and are demanding the full force of government to prevent it. That is the clear message from last week's excellent L.A.

(USA) - In the history of Man, technology has not been kind to free speech. When the printing press was invented, governments recognized it as an unprecedented opportunity to control anti-government speech, and soon introduced prior restraint, licensing, and censorship.

After weeks of rumour and rumblings at 111 Buckingham Palace Road, the Telegraph Media Group has finally launched My Telegraph, the latest a