Current print and broadcast journalism is moving away from a concept of journalism as "information people need to know" towards a notion of the "Right to Know": everything conceivable about everyone is newsworthy. It is axiomatic that a well-informed public is a better electorate. However, the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech has been stretched by journalists into the "right to know," an elastic definition of newsworthiness creating a jungle of journalistic voyeurism, providing information that titillates rather than informs. The recent coverage of soap-opera elements of public figures' lives (such as Gary Hart) provides several cases in point. The American Mass Media Machine should re-orient itself toward an ethically-based journalism, one which includes in its criteria of newsworthiness decency and fairness, "redeeming social value," and maintaining the dignity of news subjects. Otherwise, its credibility will suffer. Moreover, information important to the electorate may go unreported or be lost in trivialities. Business (financial) decisions determine newsworthiness; sex and sleaze sell papers and garner ratings points. However, the public's needs should prevail over the ledger sheet--the Mass Media Machine should use discriminating taste and judgment in deciding what information to present and how to present it. (SR)