Can We Trust Any Reporter NOW?

I have always had a problem with this!
"a creditable source said"
"a senior official"
"a highly placed aid"

Now, after CBS and Dan Rather, I believe we should again question this. Years ago when the MSM (Mainstream Media) only agenda was to sell their product it may not have been as large an issue; however, now their agenda is to sway public opinion, seat their political choice, and promote their political agenda. Should the American People not look at these MSM outlets with the same skepticism we would look at the "boy who cried wolf"?

I am just a simply country boy that was taught my word is the only thing I can control and I should stand behind what you say or admit my error. As we have seen recently you do not need to substantiate your charge to get it published as long as it is in line with the MSM’s agenda. I believe that we need to revisit the “defamation” laws and redefine “malice”.

If anyone here believes that Rather and CBS were absent of “malice” when they broadcasted their story about the memos, you need to wake up and smell the coffee. We may want to insist that we know who their source is; if these sources really believe they can be “deep throat” and not be discovered they are mistaken with today’s technology so why bother! I believe it will certainly add creditability to a medium that has ZERO if their sources have put something more than their anonymity on the line.

Besides, using the MSM’s tactics I can say anything I wish about anybody and add “a senior source told me”; of course in court, not being a member of the media, I will have to prove it – Shouldn’t we require the same standard from reporters?

What are your thoughts?