Mark Jurkowitz

The tactical success of the surge and the tactical failures of the new Democratic Congress are among the reasons why the five-year-old conflict seems to have disappeared from the headlines. And then there are the competing demands of covering the most intriguing presidential campaign in recent memory.

It wasn’t quite “Dewey Defeats Truman,” but after the Jan. 8 Granite State primary confounded many of the pollsters and pundits, one of the key story lines that emerged in coverage of the McCain and Clinton victories was the media’s proclivity to predict and pre-analyze the results.

The media were busy anointing winners after the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses. And the theme of change and surprise also resonated throughout much of the commentary. But a PEJ look at the caucus post-mortems finds that perhaps the most distinct aspect of the coverage was the certainty that something major had occurred that night in Iowa.

The jury has spoken in the perjury and obstruction trial of Scooter Libby that so intimately involved the journalism profession itself. We know the Vice President’s former top aide was found guilty. But who or what else did the media implicate in its post-verdict coverage?

The media landscape has changed dramatically since Harvard’s Shorenstein Center was established 20 years ago. And when journalists and dignitaries assembled there on Oct. 13-14 to evaluate the current role of journalism in our democracy, there was good news and bad. The bad was that new technologies have created credibility concerns and economic problems for mainstream journalists. The good news may be the emergence of the citizen journalist.