In an interview in the Washington Times, Andrew Breitbart documents the rise of the Blogosphere and new media sites such as his own and the Drudge Report:

I think that, a lot of times, before the Internet, people ended their education when they graduated college. They stopped reading, that's when their assumptions would stop, and people would close their minds, and just go along with the rest of their lives.

Part of the Generation X thesis back in the '90s was political apathy. OK, well, that's a crazy notion now, to me, because the Internet has created an environment where you've got your DailyKos and your FreeRepublic and your Lucianne.com and your HuffingtonPost. Now, everyone seems to have an opinion, and a strong one, at that.

So we went from a period of raw apathy to hyperawareness of the political realm, without the mainstream media covering that radical transformation. And the reason why is because, in the past, the old media wasn't doing its job. It bored people to tears. It was conventional wisdom for the sake of conventional wisdom, and because they were in control, they were happy with it, it was a profitable business for them. Well, the Internet has created a wonderful environment of competition for the powers that be. And now they're going to have to figure out how to give the people what they want. And the people want new information, they want fresh information, they want accurate information, they want unbiased information.

I think that in 10 to 15 years of the Internet, one thing that's for certain and absolutely, the New York, left-of-center tilt of the media had not been completely -- it was always the talk of the right wing -- but that notion is now self-evident. The Internet exposed who the reporters are. Before, people didn't know who the bylines were, now we know who they are. We know their histories. When they write something on Tuesday, we know what they said last Wednesday.

There's such a high level of accountability out there, that the very people who were criticizing the online world because there's not accountability, because there's no gatekeepers, because there's no editors, were in fact wrong. Errors were allowed to live an exceptional life in the Old Media without debunking. In the New Media, a lie cannot get out of the door before it's waylaid.

Yon's story [of Al Qaeda atrocities doesn’t get media attention] because it is humiliating.

It is humiliating because it is obvious that we media – and our allies in the state department, the legal trade, the NGOs, the Democratic Party, the UN, etc., - can’t do squat about such determined use of force.

Our words, images, arguments and skills can’t stop the killing. Only the rough soldiers and their guns can solve the problem, and we won’t admit that fact because the admission would weaken our influence and our claim to social status.

So we pretend Yon’s massacre – and the North Korean killing fields, the Arab treatment of women, the Arab hatred of Israel, etc. - doesn’t exist, and instead focus our emotions and attention on the somewhat-bad domestic things that we can ‘fix’ with our DC-based allies. Things such as Abu Ghraib, wiretapping, etc. When we ‘fix’ them, then we get status, applause, power, new jobs, ego, etc.

Please don’t be surprised. We media are an interest group not much different from the automakers, the unions, and the farmers.