This article is quite eye opening. I have never really paid close attention to the detailed way that a news broadcast unfolds. I just assumed that each news station created its own segments. But I guess that I was wrong. While these video news releases provided by the government and other organizations may meet a need for under employed companies, like WCIA, I still find that I am missing something. Why does the government find a need to create these video news releases with scripts if the intent is not to persuade the millions of Americans who watch the news every day? Why not just supply the information to the public and the news stations can take from it what they want? If these video news releases are so specific when they are released, how can the government deny that they are trying to persuade the American public? There is definitely a lack of consistency here.

The authors of the article, David Barstow and Robin Stein, point out that government officials claim that they are not at fault when a news station does not inform the public that a certain clip was supplied by a department of the government. This is simply naive. Why would a news station want to align themselves with the government? They would surely lose viewers who would rather watch some other, more independent, station. As for the news directors who pleaded ignorance when provided evidence that they aired government video news releases, I find a shortage of information. How could these directors not know where they get their footage and narration? It seems very irresponsible.

For a prominent part of the article, it seems as though the authors do not have much of a bias. But when there is an opinion shown, the authors seem to be reluctant that these government issued video news releases are being shown on television without the viewing audience knowing it. They support their opinion with a multitude of examples of how these video news releases could misinform the public. For example, the authors quote a 2000 decision made by the Federal Communications Commission: "Listeners and viewers are entitled to know by whom they are being persuaded."

Barstow and Stein dedicate a section in their article about how the government has created video news releases to show the public that they are confident about the war on terror. This was during George Bush Jr.'s presidency. Recently, during Obama's term in office, there has been less of a focus on the war on terror and more of a focus on other matters, like health care. Whether this has to do with the president at the time or with the time itself, is unclear. But there has definitely been a drop in war coverage in the news.

Once again, I feel as though Barstow and Stein place fear into their audience, as did Nicholas Carr. Whether they do this knowingly or not, I am not sure. But during the entire article, there is a looming presence of the "all-controlling government." While this is the subject of countless novels and films, it is still a far away possibility for this world. Barstow and Stein make this possibility look not so far away in their article.