The best recent example is, of course, the "surprising" results of the national elections, when voters went against the confident predictions of Washington media mavens, who confidently predicted that the Democrats would see the wrath of ten months of unrelenting news coverage of the "Monica Mess," as one cable 24-hour news channel chose to title its slanted coverage.

The voters seemed to be saying, "Enough." And the man who paid the price was, surprise, not Bill Clinton, but the media's favorite kicking boy, that paragon of vindictive politics named Newt Gingrich.

Who woulda thunk it?

Next month your obedient servant will mark his 43rd anniversary as a member of the journalism craft (or profession, as some in our business confidently assert). My love of newspapers began shortly after I learned to read. I eagerly awaited the daily visit of our faithful postman in Walton, Kentucky, who brought our copy of The Cincinnati Times-Star, a day late, because my father found that mail delivery was less expensive than having it delivered the day of publication. Dad always was frugal, despite getting his news 24 hours later than other families in Walton, only 20 miles south of Cincinnati.

Sundays were special, because there was only one Sunday paper, The Enquirer, and for some reason we actually had home delivery, just like everyone else in that community serving the needs of tobacco farmers or dairy herdsmen in rural Boone County, named for Kentucky's most famous historical figure, that bear-fighting man named Daniel Boone.

I joined the staff of The Northern Kentucky News in December of 1955. The paper was new and its editor/publisher was in desperate need of help. For two years, I sold advertising, wrote news stories and a column, then stamped addresses on the freshly printed copies before hauling stacks to the Post Office for delivery the following morning.

I was proud to be a part of the wonderful work of journalism. I've stayed in that line of work, despite a couple of pauses, ever since.

Today, I'm not so eager to proclaim my membership in the news fraternity. The world of journalism seems to have become a pariah. Recent surveys show news folks ranking in prestige lower than lawyers. The trend toward attack journalism, celebrity worship, and eagerness to expose the private lives of public people have combined to make the press take a precipitous plunge in esteem.

These days, when I'm asked my occupation, I mumble "writer," all the while hoping my questioner doesn't ask for details.

Geneva Overholser, who comments on media matters for The Washington Post, wrote about media mistrust last week. She listened five messages that a "prudent" media should hear from the election:

1. Abandon the attack mode by putting news into proportion.
2. Make sourcing stronger by eliminating, other than as a last resort, the use of anonymity. Identify the "sides" of sourcing. Stop publishing rumors or using other media as sources.
3. Step away from the role of analyst, those grubby people who appear on TV talk shows one day, then write stories the next. Eliminate arrogance.
4. Be willing to listen to criticism. Media folks like to hand it out, but are outraged when they become targets of those they cover.
5. Editors must be unbending in their duty not to release a story before it's been thoroughly resourced, checked and balanced.

The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released a poll early this year that should cause the media to change its ways. That poll showed that 63 percent of the public believes press accounts are "often inaccurate." Many news consumers think the press "gets in the way of society solving its problems."

It's unquestionably the duty of an informed media to keep a wary eye on government. But the journalist must display fairness and balance in order to restore trust.

As Overholser writes, the public finds today's journalism distasteful. In the recent election, they couldn't "vote us out, but they can surely tune us out."