The absence of news that used to be hot and heavy in news cycles heavily suggests propaganda

[DisgustipatedinCA]

14. I largely agree wtih your points

The media is fickle...check. And for what it's worth, I wasn't really even considering Fox News when I wrote the OP--this stuff is SOP for them. I was referring more to mainstream news outlets, the big 3, NPR.

I did some reading during the anthrax attacks and scare, and did learn about some of the natural ways to be exposed and harmed. But the aerosolization and weaponization of anthrax always seemed to be the domain of Ft. Detrick in my view, and I'm sure in similar places in Russia and China. A case of protesting too loudly, in my opinion. Cheney job.

Yes, the spam king did have a pretty decent market share on spam, with commensurate bandwidth wasted. But it was never something that threatened the integrity of the Internet, at least not from anything this 15-year network engineer can tell.

Agreed that nuclear power is a problem--I'm against it, but not because I believe that terror mastermind hackers are disabling control rods from their PS3's.

I partially agree and partially disagree with your last point. The media does love their shiny objects, the newer the better, but follow-up isn't needed so much when there was never anything there to begin with. Rather, I think that on the front-end, they should strive to do a better job in deciding whether government officials, military leaders, et al, are trying to gin up a propaganda story, or if they actually have an item of concern that needs to be reported.

Have a good weekend.