Glen Greenwald asks,

Is it even theoretically possible to have a worse, more deceitful and more moronic press than the one we have?

Atrios responds, Sadly, yes. But for once I disagree with Atrios. And the reasons are purely market-driven.

The only reason the "press" exists is to filter news for citizens who don't have time to filter the ever-raging torrent of news themselves. Otherwise no one would "consume" its product.

Each news consumer chooses "press" outlets that filter the news in the way that best reflects his or her values and interests. They may or may not spend money for their news, but ultimately what matters is where they spend their time because advertisers will always follow them and reward the press outlets that have the most and best consumers.

In the 19th Century, big city readers had many newspapers to choose from, and market forces rewarded the "best" press. But press economics were completely transformed in the mid-20th Century by radio and TV broadcasting, because licenses were restricted and big corporations cornered the market (except for plucky alternative Pacifica Radio). The corporate-owned press wasn't interested in values, just profits, so it stopped competing on values and started competing on access - who could get the scoop or the best newsmaker interview.

That is the "press" that Glenn Greenwald and Atrios and the rest of us all rail against. It was a virtual monopoly until the emergence of the "blogosphere" around 2003. But George Bush drove the "press" over the cliff with the invasion of Iraq.

Luckily for America, the Internet had emerged as an alternative "press." There were good magazines like Salon and The Nation, and lots of smaller proto-blogs like Democrats.com. Thanks to Blogger.com, in 2003 it became possible for anyone to start a blog, giving rise to instant "press" stars like Atrios, Digby, Crooks and Liars.

Driven by the unrelenting and disastrous Iraq war lies, intelligent citizens started reading blogs and stopped consuming the garbage produced by the corrupt "access" press.

This was the free market for news at work. And it is because of the free market - made possible by the neutral Internet - that the "press" can only get better, not worse.

This year, market forces compelled second-tier newspapers to close their Washington bureaus and remove a lot of dead wood. Quality blogs with first-rate Washington reporters like the Huffington Post, Salon, Talking Points Memo, The Nation, Mother Jones, Americablog, Raw Story, and the Washington Independent are quickly replacing them, making "the press" genuinely better.

And market forces are even working their magic on TV. FOX was always just a Republican propaganda outlet, but Democratic victories in 2006 and 2008 persuaded MSNBC executives there was a market for progressive viewpoints. They put their toes in the water with Keith Olbermann and discovered the water was fine, which allowed them to give Rachel Maddow a much-deserved show. Their success is slowly spreading throughout the MSNBC schedule, and will someday breach the hostile "press" bastions of Morning Joe, the Sunday shows, and CNN.

Thanks to Internet neutrality, the genuine free market in news is a wondrous thing indeed!