The Death of Diversity?

With Internet giant AOL's takeover of Time Warner, almost all the major news media is owned by the same company. This poses a threat to the plurality and independence of views. 

For example, CNN, Asiaweek and Time are not balanced in their coverage of the reaction towards the terror attack. Very little attention is paid to the plight of innocent Afghans who have suffered numerous wars. If there were a war, the death toll will definitely be higher than that at WTC.

Unlike conventional wars, America cannot declare war on Afghanistan because the latter did not initiate the terror attacks and should not be punished for the crimes of a few individuals. 

American government's unwillingness to supply evidence to prove that Osama Bin Laden's the mastermind or when asking other countries to hand over terrorist suspects is an aberration. The usual legal practice assumes that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Thus the American government is in fact making a mockery of its legal system. 

News websites act as accomplices when they go all out to demonise Osama bin Laden and write as though he were the mastermind. This will prejudice any court trial if there were any. 

Furthermore, the repeated broadcast of Palestinians and Iraqis celebrating the terror attacks will increase hatred for Arabs in general and make Americans even more eager for retaliation. 

Is the media more concerned with agreeing with the general public (About 80% of Americans want retaliation) or the balanced viewpoint?Another consideration is readership( and the bottom line). Is a news magazine prepared to put their profitability and readership at stake by not agreeing with their views?

 As the chief domain in the public sphere of rational discussion, the media should come out strongly against the government for its unjustified practices but disappointingly, it has not done so.