Are moles and pins really the biggest issues?

I am continually amazed at the 'stories' that the media choose to cover; so often the topics are not relevant to peoples' lives, and aren't by any stretch constructive information. This is especially true now with the presidential race making up so much of the coverage.

Example 1: How many hours of coverage were devoted to Barack Obama NOT wearing a flag pin at a certain photo-op? His choice of lapel adornment doesn't affect his ability to be president, nor do I believe it reflects a secret inner aversion to America. But the pundits had air time to fill, so away they spun.

Example 2: John McCain can't be president because he's dying of skin cancer. Or at least that seems to be the message sent by the mainstream media back in July when he had a mole removed. Andrew Romano blogged about this 'event' being blown out of proportion, citing a Washington Post item that wondered "whether the 'mole like' skin has any long term ramifications on the campaign." How could it possibly?
Unless he's dying.

Richard Stengel, managing editor of Time magazine, wrote this week about the media's roll in deciding what's talked about. "The 24/7 news cycle--cable television, the Internet, the blogosphere--has the effect of trivializing big stories and making big stories out of trivial ones." So in the end, instead of engaging in issues like America's presence in Iraq or how to stop the mortgage meltdown, we're hearing about how a man is unfit for the presidency because he forgot to put on his flag pin.
A pin that was probably made in China anyway.

Now there's a cable news-worthy story.