Conine's question suggests one of the reasons for the current dissatisfaction by many with the media's coverage and reporting of the news. How can stories relating to the persecution and killing of people--especially on such massive scales as was the case in Cambodia and is currently the case in Afghanistan--not receive at least as much attention as President Reagan's visit to Bitburg?
The point is that the ability of the world press to influence the regimes that threaten the lives of the oppressed people who live under them is perhaps the most important function newspapers, radio and television can perform, and should supersede coverage of "media events" and more mundane stories, which should be relegated, in the press, to the back pages (I am not implying that the Bitburg story was mundane--it was not.)
We in the free world tend to thin out our moral stature by whatever degree we do apply our values and standards equally.
CONRAD G. WELLING