I don't know if this thread drift, or a natural evolution of the discussion....

Having worked in the public sector all of my adult life in programs and agencies that (quite properly) have strict legal constrictions on the information they can release to protect the privacy and confidentiality of recipients of assorted publicly funded human and social services, I have read many a news story that was inaccurate, in part, but only in part, because only one side of the "story" was available to the news media. The news media, however, is very aware that social service agencies are very restricted in the information they can release, and is therefore aware they are only getting part of the "story." That could be put across in reporting in more clear terms than "citing privacy restrictions, the Dept. of Social Services had no comment." The amount of knowing spin reporters put on such stories has always dismayed me, and leads me to a basic scepticism about most reported news. Reporters of generally reputable news sources put the spin to it because it makes good copy and sells newspapers. Quoted "experts" put their spin on it in order to influence public opinion toward their particular cause or perspective. News media know this, but often fail to make this apparent in their reporting. NPR seems to me to do a much better job at providing objective coverage than any other news outlet in the country, but they certainly do not do a perfectly objective job.

One reason I do not follow the news extremely closely is because of my perception that there is little news that is reported in an objective manner. I do not have the time or the interest to closely read or follow a number of different news sources with different biases to try to separate the facts from the spin, and must rely on my own wit and discernment. So I take most of what I read or listen to with a grain of salt, always wondering where the "truth" lies, and always trying to be mindful of how my own philosophical leanings or emotional reactions might color how I interpret the news that I take in.

Claymore's post tends to confirm for me the need to be skeptical of all that I read that is reported as news, or reported as expert opinion.    I have a lot of respect for the work of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Claymore, if you had not given Dees and the Center their due for the effective work they have done, I would tend to discount your other comments about Dees, because it would not fit in with my own biases. Thanks for sharing your experience, knowledge and perspective.