Limited blogging for a while — the blog is being occupied.
Which beats the alternative.
(via Maxspeak. Poor guy.)
A Personal Blog
by Michael Froomkin
Laurie Silvers & Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Miami School of Law
My Publications | e-mail
All opinions on this blog are those of the author(s) and not their employer(s) unelss otherwise specified.
Who Reads Discourse.net?
Readers describe themselves.
Please join in.Reader Map
Recent Comments
- Brooks Fudenberg on I Voted
- Jermaine Chad Ingram on Some Thoughts about the Downballot (Voters’ Guide Part II: Judicial Retention Elections)
- C.E. Petit on I Voted
- Jane Moscowitz on I Voted
- Ally Figueroa on Some Thoughts about the Downballot (Voters’ Guide Part II: Judicial Retention Elections)
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 52 other subscribers
There is a great post on The Carpetbagger Report from a few days ago about the mainstream media’s (specifically Time magazine’s) ignoring the prosecutor purge scandal.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10367.html
What explains the failure of the mainstream media to cover the purge scandal for so long, and so many other scandals? Do you think somebody just set up newspaper editors to cheat on their wives, and threatened to tell if the editors wouldnt play ball when they come back some day and ask for something?
It wouldnt be that hard to do, when you think about it. People wouldnt talk about it.
Can’t agree. In very limited use, its possible that everyone would stay silent. But if such a tactic is used more often, someone would certainly go public. There are other reasons that this is unlikely as well.
It is hard to explain the failure of the press to report on this and other scandals, I agree, but your suggestion is just not possible I am afraid.
LACJ, what are the other reasons?