Bob Woodward came across a memo from U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld while researching State of Denial. The May 1 memo, Illustrative New 21st Century Institutions and Approaches, contained this thought:

Strategic communications . . . A new U.S. agency for global communication could serve as a channel to inform, educate and compete in the battle for ideas. . . .

Today the centers of gravity of the conflict in Iraq and the global war on terror are not on battlefields overseas. Rather, the center of gravity of this war are on the centers of public opinion in the U.S. and in the capitals of free nations. The gateways to those centers are the international media hubs and the capitals of the world. [Ayman al-] Zawahiri has said that 50 percent of the current struggle is taking place in the arena of public information. That may be an understatement. Osama bin Laden, Zawahiri, [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi had media committees that consistently outpace our ability to respond. When the U.S. government tries to compete in the communications arena it runs up against lack of national consensus and understanding about what means are acceptable to the media and to the Congress and disagreements as to what is legal. ...

Hmmm. A "new U.S. agency for global communication could serve as a channel to inform, educate and compete in the battle for ideas. ..." I've got it: Privatize and go with Fox News World!

U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had an op-ed piece in Saturday's Washington Post to say progress has been made in Afghanistan since the U.S. invaded five years ago.

NYT public editor Byron Calame on the risks of having the paper's reporters pop off in public with personal views.

Roy Peter Clark of the Poynter Institute seems to have taken inspiration from Twisted Sister's seminal headbanger anthem when it comes to rote, unsubstantiated attacks on the mainstream news media.

Unfortunately, I can't seem to find his column, published Saturday on page F6 of the Toronto Star, on TheStar.com as I write this. And look at the even more unfortunate result when I Google the headline:

Anyway, here are some of Clark's words of outrage:

I've made a personal decision. I will no longer stand by in the face of automatic attacks upon the press. More than wrong, such attacks are harmful, not just to our credibility, but to those citizens we seek to serve. To the extent that we journalists shrug our shoulders at the thought of an energetic defence of our craft -- to that extent we are complicit.

 Earlier this week, The Globe and Mail had its comment and editorial page editors on globeandmail.com taking questions from readers. One was from a William Sellar of Port Hope, Ont., who I suspect is the former ombudsman of the Toronto Star.

He wanted to know whether budget cuts and the trend to punditry, among other things, were hurting editorial pages.