Right on -- why should the press be able to report on what the government is doing, positive or negative? It's hard to think of any other industry that expects to operate in a free manner like that. Mind you, it's also hard to think of any industry that is specifically empowered by the Constitution to operate in a free manner, but, hey, that's just a technicality. The free press is one of those outdated concepts like the Geneva Convention and habeas corpus that we really don't need anymore.

Sarcasm aside, as much as Jefferson grew to hate the specifics of the newspapers that reported on him, he defended the concept of press freedom, realizing a difference between the specific media outlet and the broader need for a free press. Jefferson had a wider vision than the average person, but surely we can see beyond the specific case to the greater good, can't we? Yes, sometimes a pot dealer walks free because he wasn't properly Mirandized, but that doesn't mean we should start kicking down doors and tapping phones. Or at least, it didn't used to. And, similarly, your (and my) distaste for the shills at the White House Correspondents Annual White House Dinner and Self-Promotional Daisy Chain shouldn't overwhelm the obvious benefits of the First Amendment.