Does 'TIme' Think Americans Are Too Stupid To Read News—Or Are Today's 'Professional' Journalists Just Too Dumb To Report It?

I read an intriguing if not frightening post on Daily Kos—that has appeared in similar form on a number of webbies—illustrating how Time magazine cover stories differ on a regular basis in the U.S. versus its three other markets: Europe, Asia and the South Pacific.

Overseas, the news mag devotes coverage to pivotal global stories impacting the world at large. Here in America, however, we get such vapid, self-absorbed nonsense as this week's "How Anxiety Is Good For You" or recent stories prattling about "Chore Wars," "Why Mom Liked You Best" and "Who Needs Marriage?"

The critical question that Kos asks: "Do these moments of marketing reveal more about Americans or about the state of American journalism?" I suspect the latter... With the majority of veteran writers laid off years ago, the average "professional" journalist simply doesn't have depth or experience to report on much beyond what they see on E! or Bravo. For example...

December 5, 2011: U.S. "How Anxiety Is Good For You" (Trust me, it's not) vs. "Revolution Redux" about new post-military Egyptian political rule.
August 8, 2011: U.S. "Chore Wars" in the banal battle of men against women and their bratty babies vs. "Travels Through Islam," examining a historical look at the region.
October 3, 2011: The asinine U.S. "Why Mom Liked You Best," the Science of Favortism (get over it) vs. "Why Germany Can't Save the World."
November 29, 2010: U.S. "Who Needs Marriage" vs. "The Lady Returns," about the Burmese Opposition politico.