Now, I'll grant that I've been just as vocal about ol' Dan needing to be put out to pasture (not, necessarily, like I was per my previous post, but there's always the entertainment value to consider...) as the next guy. Unfortunately, I also happen to agree with those who don't really feel a need to celebrate just now.
Gerard at American Digest points out - correctly - that Dan is just the most visible mask covering a much deeper problem. Dan's resignation is very similar to any ol' CEO of a scandal-plagued corporation. The scandal river runs deep, and many more heads need to roll before anyone will trust them again.
The basic problem remains: Mainstream Media is biased and no one in the industry really wants to admit that this is a problem. One of two things needs to happen before any level of trust can be restored. Either MSM admits their bias and continues doing what they do best, or they admit their bias and take real steps to eliminate bias in their reporting.
My guess? Business as usual. This is the Watergate stonewall-at-any-cost mentality that refuses to admit that the problem even exists. We've already seen ample evidence of this attitude in statements made by MSM executives, anchors (even those who normally despise each other in real life), reporters and correspondents on the ground, and even retired journalists. Those who would dare admit that bias might exist to any degree, however small, are at the fringe of the MSM biosphere, and tend not to warrant any notice. Bloggers live outside the fringe in MSM's estimation, and will continue to be regarded as disease-ridden vermin.
Tactically this is a good thing. This means that while the blogosphere continues to evolve and consolidate their collective talents, the MSM will continue to struggle with protecting their stockholders' interests. They will implement many "fresh" approaches to their reporting, even while failing to address the bias issue in any constructive manner. They will use all manner of corporate-speak blather to fool us into thinking that they've licked this bias thing for good, while continuing to conspire with Democratic operatives in planning the 2008 campaign.
So, Dan can resign, Peter may retire, and Tom could be fired tomorrow. 'Twould make little difference.
'Twould be news, though.
UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds (The InstaPundit) notes this quote from one of my favorite politicos, Loretta Sanchez (a local Democrat), made to Wolf Blitzer on CNN:
"The media certainly is not in our hands any longer."
Glenn's comment: Indeed.
My comment: Oh, puhleeze. Like this is news.