I think that Mr. Dobbs was trying to make the point that the news emphasizes the wrong things. I would agree with this. Mr. Dobbs's next point was that what the paper should be concentrating on is the atrocities of the world and foolish things like "50-foot mechanical spiders" are unimportant. This I mostly disagree with.

To say that more Americans, especially those in the privileged class of collegians, should be more informed of the world around us, is a perfectly appreciable point. Why on earth would you then take this to where we just learn about the horrors of the world, rather than human triumphs? When was the last time you built a 50-foot mechanical spider that could stand, much less move at a human walking pace? Why is this not a great news story? Yes, AIDS, Darfur, and wars are happening, but people already know about them because of how much the media lingers on such stories because being informed about the world apparently means finding out how much of the rest of the world sucks compared to us. What you're implying is that news should not be an objective way to find out about the world, but what people feel the world needs to know, which can go from noble to advertising in next to no time, and I would argue already has.

I also thought your way of finding out how informed the students are was a little...more than unscientific, but less than dumb. The question about Putin, if you paid more attention to Russia than simply googling "Who's the President of Russia", is relatively moot. Putin definitely holds the power in Russia (as prime minister, by the way, which is arguably more powerful than the prez over there regardless) and the new preident was hand-picked to continue his policies before Putin even gave up his office. In addition, I know it's cool to be liberal until you're actually working for your money, but why didn't you ask about Obama's policies? And what does anyone know about Joe Biden before he became the VP candidate? What does anyone know about Biden now that he is the VP candidate? A helluva lot less than they know about Palin, thanks to the news.

Along these lines, I would like to double duty this post and ask the Sun editor reading this to please, for the love of God, remove "Doonesbury" from this paper. As one of the handful of students who probably actually fully reads your paper on a regular basis, I don't care if your opinion articles, editorials, and story selections have a liberal bias, but not the cartoons, man. Not the cartoons. They're my retreat from reality, yet instead of more Mr. Gnu I get a double dose of bad...I would say satire here, but that's my point. It's not even a funny comic. Neither is the thinly veiled racist comic that for some reason talks about Halfricans in what I find to be a quite unflattering light at the top of the comics page, but at least you don't put that one twice. I'd settle for getting rid of that propaganda strip that hasn't once made me even smile.

Back to the article, though, it's true people should care about who they're voting for, and while I despise Time and Newsweek which sacrifice stories for pretty pictures, USNWR certainly deserves more circulation than People Magazine (until the school rankings story, which nobody cares about unless they're applying to or in college). But, as this is half our fault, one has to wonder if it's because all these "news" magazines had been writing for some time before the tabloids was the horrors of our age, and not our triumphs, and people would rather see Britney Spears suck at life than the Human Race suck at living.

P.S.- The only reason I register Republican is because I hate the media.

Mr. Dobbs, Bravo! (not the popular channel, but the exclamation), because that IS a good point. More than almost. I don't think you request that the media forgoes foolish news stories for necessarily atrocious ones, just for those which are well, newsworthy. Nor do you request more left-leaning agendas, nor more to the right; just more that might sway a reader's opinion, and actually get them thinking (I know, that hurts). Don't get me wrong Bubba --that 50-foot spider innovation was stimulating, and ground-breaking. I just didn't care to be wrapped in silk webbing since I was hoping to seek something noteworthy á la major networks of the 80's. Back before American Idol --and even before The Real World captivated audiences seeking the one-dimensional surface quirks of everyday people, magnifying nobodys into somebodys-- ABC, NBC and CBS delivered nightly news to families across the U.S., and quinquagesimal-length arachnids were rightfully restrained to the sensational pages of Star and Globe.

Mr. Dobbs is right to question the character and the drive of a people more interested in People than in the people actually running this world, destroying it, fighting for it, innovating it, stimulating it, beautifying it, and changing it, for better or worse. Britney Spears might change a few lives, but really, is her influence as potentially far-reaching and consequential as the future Iranian President, to be determined in a little-known-by-Americans election in Tehran mere months after our own rundown between Palin and Obama (really, who else is running?). It's not that Spears doesn't have a place in the American psyche (though I'd miss her like I'd miss Sesame Seeds); it's just that she belongs in (a censored) US Weekly and not U.S. News and World Report. It's old news that she sucks at living, but if we keep treating it with novelty (not to mention the fuel of more dollars) then we are indeed the ones who suck at living. What is the bigger story? You might be tired of hearing about the war in Darfur. At least it has a chance to improve if it is given media attention. Certain celebrities drinking and cocaine-habits will just thrive with more attention. It's up to us, and to Mr. Dobbs to demand news that is newsworthy, and I thank him for it.

And, since I had to read some double duty Doonesbury disdain, I'll deliver a dose of my own Democratic designation. Yes, I think it's cool to be liberal, but contrary to Bubba Jim (R-State of Media Hate) I think it's even cooler to stay liberal after "you're actually working for your money". It takes a self-interested soul to make money and vote solely on account of maintaining his lot. It takes a caring human to make money and still vote (D) for society. Besides, how much are we talking: $5,000,000, or some chump change?

you claim so called Cornellians are ignorant, yet who are you to define the terms of ignorance?

These so called Cornellians outside this Trillium are doing the things they do. Let them.

and your research is so highly unscientific that associating yourself with it brings down your argument and inclines the self identifying intellectual reader to dismiss you in entirety.

I think the main issues you failed to address before proceeding to your "main" point is that of the responsibility of each member of a nation under democracy. Who and why is responsible for searching out complete knowledge in an election? Every single citizen eligible to vote?

or address entertainment VS news VS news as entertainment in media.

and try to make your writing more dry, emotionless and analytic. That would appeal to me more.

The best part of your essay is the acknowledgment of the immense potential of so called Cornellians.

A++ Daily Sun Guest Space writer would read again!

Yes, I too found this piece shallow and pedantic. It is clearly not up to the high standards of a refined reader such as I.

You see, I read the New Yorker. *And* the Economist.

Your so-called "research" that you use to "establish" your so-called "main" point leaves much to be desired. I was so appalled by the lack of so-called "professionalism" that I vomited eggs florentine and sauce Bernaise all over my cardigan. I think I might have fainted from sheer disgust had I not treated myself with Christopher Hitchens columns and the smell of my own flatulence.

Out of your failings, of which there are many, your so-called "main" problem is that you are not as intelligent as I am. How dare you criticize people, such as these so-called Cornelians, as they are commonly known? Only I have the right to criticize people. In fact, I've just written a simply delightful piece on McSweeney's that lays out the rest of your flaws in greater detail. I've just shared it with my friends over Cafe Americanos and they found it simply delightful, and we all enjoyed being cultured and intellectual and fingerbanging one another.

If you want me to take you seriously in the future and avoid unpleasantness such as this, you should write in a more analytical style, like the Economist does.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Quod erat demonstrandum. Did I mention that I speak Latin? Well, I do. If you want to craft a good argument, it's important to include Latin phrases just to prove how much more you know than everyone else.

The best part of your essay is how good it makes me feel to know that I am better than you.

good article. very punchy