In 2010, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced a $1.25 billion settlement in the discrimination lawsuit by African-American agriculture producers. The case, commonly known as Pigford I or II, represents the largest civil rights settlement in the history of the United States. Yet very few media outlets provided original or continued coverage of the case. The two media outlets that most frequently gave the settlement attention were National Public Radio and the Washington Post. Both are based in the D.C. area and are known for covering the national political scene. The Associated Press had a handful of articles and briefs related to the case. The NPR reports and AP articles then were recycled through media outlets across the United States. Granted, limited attention is better than no attention – but why, in a region in which agriculture is a leading industry, did we not see more original reporting by Midwest media?

Before the nation heard of Hadiya Pendleton, the grim realities of Chicago’s gun violence had been largely overlooked by United States media outlets. Not anymore. The 15-year-old’s tragic shooting death in Chicago Jan. 29 highlighted the impact gangs and gun violence have had on the nation’s third-largest city. News coverage revealed that Pendleton, a high school honors student and majorette, had performed with her school’s band in the parade at President Obama’s inauguration just a week earlier. With that angle, the story immediately gained prominence over other similar incidents involving innocent teens being caught in gang members’ crosshairs.

What’s scandalmongering got to do with journalism and the powers that be? Maybe far less than most of us who give a hoot about journalism care to admit. “Media Gets Targeted by Obama, Discovers No One Cares Except the Media,” wrote Bethania Palma Markus, a Los Angeles-area reporter, on the left-wing blog Counterpunch. She claimed the media “never cared about (the government’s) abuse of power until it hit them in the face,” as in the recent scandals involving the Associated Press and Fox News. She’s not hit the bull’s eye, but she makes a good point. Who indeed should be concerned about what Obama officials did when they seized AP telephone records and spied on a Fox News correspondent?

“Covering agribusiness in the heartland is like covering Apple in Washington or Google in Silicon Valley.” This was told to more than two dozen journalists who cover agriculture by Craig Gunderson of the University of Illinois. Gunderson was speaking to the group as part of a three-day workshop on agribusiness reporting conducted by the Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting.

Images of blood-covered children and horrified adults, sounds of howling winds and screaming people, live videos of approaching storms and devastating destruction have all permeated our media coverage of the recent tornado in Moore, Okla. Such news coverage, tagged “Disaster Marathon” by Tamar Liebes, an Israeli media researcher, represents common journalistic practices for covering horror tales of suicide bombings, natural disasters and major accidents. With handheld mobile devices, every passer-by can document the experience in sight and sound (and contribute to our thirst for gory images) as we struggle with the emotional weight of making sense of such tragedies. But what about our children?

Almost every U.S. schoolchild knows that democracy means “the people rule” or “government by the people,” or some variation on that theme. Right? Well, not really. The world is a lot more complicated than that and includes the fact that intense and mobilized minorities exercise an impact on public policy far in excess of what their numbers of members or sympathizers would justify. Nowhere is this political weight and outsized impact on public policy more clearly evident than in the debate and conflict over guns and gun legislation. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is one of the most powerful and well-financed interest groups in Washington, or in any state capital. It works consistently and effectively to define the framing of the gun control debate, and to ensure that federal and state policies reflect its preferences.

The press has been breathless in its coverage of the three “scandals” that plague the first months of President Obama’s second term. It has been especially hyperbolic in covering the issue on which it has a direct interest: subpoenas of reporters. Americans are told that the scandals are another Watergate, that Obama is Nixonian, that Obama will be forced to appoint a special counsel, that the president’s entire second term could be destroyed by the IRS, Benghazi and press subpoenas episodes. It is hardly noticed that there is no evidence of criminality or presidential involvement in any of the alleged misdeeds.

“Obama’s war on journalism.” That’s what Eli Lake, national security correspondent for the Daily Beast and Newsweek (and former State Department correspondent for the UPI) called it. “Instead of calling it Obama’s war on whistleblowers, let’s call it what it is,” he said.