Do they even read what they write?

Pardon me for harping on the Natasha Richardson death, but do newspapers even bother anymore to read what they write?  This is from the AP:

The statement did not give details on the cause of death for Richardson, who suffered a head injury when she fell on a beginner’s trail during a private ski lesson at the luxury Mont Tremblant ski resort in Quebec.

If the statement about Richardson’s death from those in the only position to know did not tell why she died, how can the writer assert with such confidence that her death was from a head injury?  Shouldn’t the story state that Richardson “suffered a probable head injury?”  After all, this is the same news service that will forever call someone an “alleged” killer, even after the guy (or gal) is convicted and sitting on death row.  Why the certitude here?

Again, this isn’t really about Richardson’s death.  It’s simply that the reporting about her injury and death is a perfect example of the media approach to information.  The media stakes out a position and then sticks to that position come Hell or high water.

In that regard, I strongly urge you to read Bernard Goldberg’s A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media. It’s a quick read (took me about an hour) and it doesn’t contain anything you all don’t already know, since all of us followed the election so closely.  Nevertheless, it’s a witty and amusing précis of the media’s wholehearted abandonment of the truth in pursuit of a goal.