VIRGINIA POSTREL is having an interesting conversation with readers on car aesthetics.

NEW BLOGGER? OR JUST INTERESTED IN STARTING A BLOG? This post from The Mudville Gazette is a must-read.

IS JOURNALISM GETTING WORSE, OR ARE PEOPLE PAYING MORE ATTENTION? YES! Well, Howard Kurtz inclines toward the more attention angle:

Has journalism become an ethical cesspool, or just been forced to adopt greater standards of cleanliness?

In the past month alone, four reporters for major newspapers have been ousted, and a columnist was suspended, for ethical missteps. The drip-drip-drip of disclosures about sloppiness, fabrication and plagiarism have further eroded the media’s reputation, leading to a one-strike-and-you’re-out policy at many outlets. . . .

Media bosses are getting tougher on wayward staffers not just because of a greater sense of professionalism, but because outsiders — led by bloggers and other critics — have stepped up the pressure. In the Internet age, there’s no rug under which to sweep these problems.

“Because we are self-policing so much better, it makes it seem like there’s a tremendous cascade of ethical violations,” says Thomas Kunkel, dean of the University of Maryland’s journalism school. “There used to be a lot more in the way of shenanigans and monkey business that we either didn’t know about or, if it was caught, it was winked at. There was a boys-will-be-boys quality about it — they were mostly boys — and they would get a slap on the wrist at best.”

I’d say there’s less outright bribery, and more ideological bias than there was, say, 50 years ago. But I’m not sure it’s possible to compare, since there was much less transparency then. I’m pretty sure, though, that things will continue to tighten up.

LARRY KUDLOW wonders why the media emphasize bad economic news? BizzyBlog responds.

UNSCAM UPDATE:

The United States Congress is demanding the right to hear from two investigators who quit the United Nations inquiry into the Oil-for-Food scandal because they felt that it was too soft on Kofi Annan. . . .

Questions have been raised about Mr Volcker’s impartiality by the resignation of the two investigators and by his ties to a company once run by Maurice Strong, a Canadian tycoon and diplomat under investigation by the Volcker panel.

I don’t think that the Volcker inquiry is going to satisfy the U.N.’s critics, nor should it.

WHY THE SUDDEN SURGE OF PRO-DEMOCRACY MOVEMENTS?

Many answers have been proposed. Some point to international causes: the military overthrow of authoritarian regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq was shock therapy for a stagnant Middle East and Central Asia; the Iraqi elections inspired others who are living without the benefits of democracy; the latest developments are just a continuation of the “third wave” of democratization that began at the end of the Cold War. Other answers to the “Why now?” question relate to the conditions within societies that lead to the successful mobilization of democratic sentiment — the factors that allow unified oppositions and disciplined political movements to form.

There is, of course, no single answer to this question.

However, the role of information and communication technology in these recent revolutions is one prominent factor that is utterly new, as the amount of attention this phenomenon has received suggests. Indeed, the Internet, blogs, cell phones, and satellite television have been prominent players in democratic movements from Egypt to Ukraine, and these technologies have served as both international and intra-national catalysts for political change.

Read the whole thing.

DRIVING THE INSTA-DAUGHTER TO SCHOOL, I caught Bill Bennett complaining about Laura Bush’s Chippendale jokes. Lighten up, Bill.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL looks at the accelerating decline of newspaper circulations:

Long stuck in a slow decline, U.S. newspapers face the prospect of an accelerated drop in circulation. The slide is fueling an urgent industry discussion about whether the trend can be halted in a digital age and is forcing newspaper executives to rethink their traditional strategies.

Rather than simply trying to halt the decline, which can be done readily through discounts and promotions, they’re being forced to try to “manage” their circulation in new ways. Some publishers are deliberately cutting circulation in the hope of selling advertisers on the quality of their subscribers. Others are expanding into new markets to make up for losses in their core markets. Some are switching to a tabloid format or giving away papers to try to attract younger readers. Others are pouring money into television and radio advertising and expensive face-to-face sales pitches to potential subscribers. . . .

At the same time, many newspapers have undercut the print product itself, trimming staff and coverage. They also have failed to figure out how to attract younger readers to their pages.

I would suggest that reporting interesting news that people can’t get elsewhere might help. I suspect, however, that we’ll see more focus on “edgier” presentations and more colorful graphics.

THE BETTER THINGS GO IN AFGHANISTAN, THE LESS WE HEAR ABOUT THEM: Luckily, Arthur Chrenkoff is picking up the slack.

UPDATE: And it reappears! Peter Ingemi noticed:

Apparently there was a blast in Afghanistan today. CNN led with it at 8 when I woke up (late).

This is the first I’ve heard of the place in months on the TV. I wonder how CNN managed to find the place. If this doesn’t prove Arthur’s point about coverage nothing does. (As if we needed proof).

As if.

“YOU’RE A SELFISH BASTARD, PABLO:” LT Smash meets Naval deserter Pablo Paredes, and they discuss war and morality.

AUSTIN BAY LOOKS AT the leaked Giuliana Sgrena report and offers comments.