NYT's Major Expose On ... Nothing

I couldn't believe how many click-throughs it took to get to the NYTimes' bold expose on the Bush administration's use of pre-packaged news segments for TV stations -- EIGHT! They covered the invasion of Iraq with fewer, as I recall, and probably wouldn't stretch a Martian invasion with more than six.

They seem to be ired that federal agencies want to tell their stories. This might be a problem if the federal agencies were running willy-nilly promoting programs Congress didn't pass. But that's not the case. Is it a problem if the TV stations broadcast the segments as if they were home-produced instead of government-fed? The NYT seems to think so, but doesn't the same free market that allows this also allow the NYT to repackage press releases from trial attorneys, liberal think tanks, teachers unions and Democrat operatives as if it were their news?

Are we supposed to accept this story as news? No, it wouldn't make the paper, except for the NYT's blinding Bush-hatred. NYT just about admits as much, then guesses, then waffles:

Federal agencies have been commissioning video news releases since at least the first Clinton administration. ... Under the Bush administration, federal agencies appear to be producing more releases, and on a broader array of topics.

A definitive accounting is nearly impossible.

Appear to? Impossible to measure? It's either a story that's worth reporting, or its a sham-slam that's not.

Somebody call Dan Rather! We finally found the first piece of evidence that MSM are, indeed, biased!