Royce asked: Is there any reason to be hopeful that the press failings in the run up to the Iraq war will be turned around in the future, given the reductions in news gathering (as opposed to bloggers and commentators) staff in light of business pressures (declining readership, and profit motives) on newspapers?

Royce, there's a lot of good journalism going on in this country, especially in magazines where writers are given time to produce serious reporting and are backed up by diligent fact-checkers. The New Yorker, Mother Jones, The Atlantic Monthly, Harper's — just four of the many I read regularly. I read a lot of others for their opinions — left, right, and otherwise — to inform my own rather than to sway them. Also, there are good bloggers who take evidence-driven journalism seriously, most famously Josh Marshall at talkingpointmemo.com . For years, though, I have relied primarily on non-fiction books of reportage and analysis. One of the days I'll post my most recent favorites.

Many people asked about the state of the media after viewing BUYING THE WAR.

Richard asked: "By the way did the Knight Ridder (now McClatchy) stories have any influence on the demise of Knight Ridder?"

No, Richard, I don't think Knight Ridder's reporting about Iraq had anything to do with its demise as a group, or its sale to McClatchy. A handful of predatory investors for whom enough is never enough went after it like lions after a wounded gazelle.

Steve asked: "Would we have had a chance to avoid this tragic mistake if not for FOX news? I mean, was corporate ownership of the MSM (as mentioned by Rather) already enough to seal our doom?"

Steve, it's hard to say that corporate ownership of the MSM would have produced the misguided invasion without FOX (not that FOX isn't corporate, too) FOX wasn't around for the Vietnam war, or the Gulf War. Rightwing partisan talk radio was a powerful force in amplifying the Administration's propaganda — plus the "groupthink" in official circles, including media elites. For sure, FOX acted as the official White House cheerleader in the cable world (the only channel watched in most government offices), reinforcing the groupthink, and , as you heard Walter Isaacson, then CNN's top honcho, say in BUYING THE WAR, it sent the patriot police after anyone who dared challenge the party line. It had lots of help — from Murdoch's WEEKLY STANDARD, a pipeline from Douglas Feith's covert propaganda mill at the Pentagon, and others.

And Bob asked, "I was wondering why there was no mention of the STRONG silence from the academic community both in the run up and conduct of the Iraq War?"

Bob, there was some sustained challenge of the official view of reality from academics, but it didn't get serious press attention. More important, I would argue, a lot of conservative religious pastors, preachers, and televangelists were beating the drums for war, most conspicuously among my old denomination, the Southern Baptists, who are now pretty much an arm of the GOP ("God's Own Party.")

Ann asks if there is anything an ordinary citizen can do.

Organize locally to demand that editors (and executive producers) provide alternative views. Sign up with FreePress.net to fight media conglomeration, and read and support those independent magazines and websites that offer an antidote to the partisan noise machine. Create and join linked communities that spread the journalism you trust.

Alas, Jerry, I did ask Jerry Miller (the 200th inmate to be exonerated by DNA of a wrongful crime) about his plans for the future, but his answer didn't survive the squeeze of editing. He's working two jobs now and hopes to go into business. We'll ask him for an update and post it here.

A good suggestion, Merrily, to take a journalistic look at the Federalist Society. Stay tuned.

As for your criticisms of the interview with Bruce Bawer: In my book, not all interviews should be adversarial; some are designed to be conversational and to bring out what the subject believes and thinks,; you can get your wrestling matches in plenty of other places. But I dispute the claims several of you made that Bawer engaged in a "wholesale labeling" of the Christian Right or of Muslims in Europe. Read his books — Stealing Jesus, A Place at the Table, and, more recently, While Europe Slept — and you'll find that he deals in particulars, names names, points to plenty of examples of what he is talking about, and doesn't tar everyone with the same brush (Puleeze: Don't let a television interview substitute for going to the original source — the book! I wouldn't have had Bawer on if I didn't think you would then want to find out more.) What he said about the buckling under by European elites wasn't off base; I've followed that story too closely myself — including a long interview last year with Hirsi Ali — to dismiss the concerns. Bawer's no Muslim baiter, and quite honestly, anyone who says he is without reading his book should be ashamed. As for hearing some Muslim voices: Watch for my upcoming broadcast with the American Imam, Zaid Shakir.

Now, John, before you complain so loud and long about my grey hairs standing in the way of "new sharp talent" as I age, well, as my high school Latin teacher, Leatus Brown, might have said: Habeoque senectuti magnam gratism, quae mihi sermonis aviditatem auxit, potionis et cibi sustulit. Look it up: De Senectute. Ch. xiv. sec.46.

I do agree with some of you who lamented that I let Nick Gillespie get away with broad inconsistencies of libertarian political and economic positions. That's because in a relatively short segment there's a limit to what could be covered, and I was more interested this time around in Nick's response to our Pat Robertson/Regent University report. He strongly disagrees with Robertson but won't put out a contract on him for either his beliefs or ambitions as long as his his own leg isn't broken or his own pocket picked. But I am not that sangiune about Pat Robertson's missionary efforts; Regent's University hopes to be the Loyola of fundamentalism. By the way, I'm not sanguine about Nick Gillespie's gospel of "free markets," which would leave the lambs at the mercy of the lions (See the book Moyers on America.) I read Reason because it is smart and challenges assumptions, but the reason no one governs according to libertarianism is that it doesn't work in the real world; little did Thomas More know that when his Utopia was finally realized, it would exist only in Milton Friedman's head. When Nick told me he doesn't vote, I thought: What a treat — not to make choices. Anyway, I invited Nick to come back and we'll take up that argument in another segment.

P.S. Some of you have asked whether I will run for office, and I've said no, I can't afford the haircuts.
--------------------

Keep'em coming.
Bill Moyers