The other important part of Tom's observation is how would you feel if the press decided you didn't have the right to know what this deranged individual said or published?

Sometimes we don't like the harsh facts but we can choose to view or not.

I've heard more complaints about the press that feature the argument that they don't tell the full story. It's not easy being the messenger. It's not always easy to balance the coverage of the full story. Ironically in many cases both sides of an issue will complain about "coverage" being slanted towards the "wrong" side.

A free press isn't perfect but what would we do without it?