By Barbara Raab, Senior Producer, NBC News

"Why is there so little coverage of Americans who are struggling with poverty?"

So begins a thought-provoking essay by Dan Froomkin in Nieman Reports, a respected publication that covers journalism, raising a subject that is getting more ink than usual these days.

In his essay, Froomkin examines what he sees as paltry coverage of America's poor. Citing research from the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, Froomkin reports that poverty coverage takes up less than one percent of the news content in the nation's major news outlets.  

He and others suggest some possible reasons ("neither advertisers nor readers are likely to demand more coverage, so neither will editors," for one) along with a wealth of ideas that could make compelling stories for readers and viewers.

Froomkin's piece begins with an example of what he'd like to see more of: a major series that ran on the front page of the Springfield News-Leader in Missouri's Ozarks for five consecutive days, focusing each day on a specific problem facing children in Missouri's Ozarks region: "No home," "No shoes," "No food," "No car," and "No peace." It's outstanding work, well worth a read.

---

Froomkin's article led the public editor (a/k/a ombudsman) of The New York Times to raise questions about her own newspaper's coverage of poverty, and to let readers know she'd be digging further into that question in coming weeks. Among her initial observations: The Times reporter who has covered poverty policy for decades thinks the paper "has made an extraordinary commitment" to the subject, but some advocates for the poor beg to differ. We'll be watching for more of this discussion in the weeks ahead.

This past Sunday, some of us woke up to a lively viewer call-in segment on C-Span’s Washington Journal about hunger in America, and about media coverage of it. A lot of callers had strong feelings about the issue, and about what should be done to attack the poverty problems in the country (as did almost all of the hundreds of commenters on our first blog post for the In Plain Sight project here).

Here is more of what the In Plain Sight team has been watching and reading this week:

• The Philadelphia Inquirer reports Philly has the highest rate of deep poverty – that’s income below half the poverty line – of big cities in America. That's perhaps not a surprise, because Philadelphia also has the highest poverty rate – 28.4 percent – of any of America’s biggest cities.
• The Washington Post had a terrific read on a Rhode Island town that relies on food stamps to survive. Be sure to check out the accompanying SNAP Map breaking down food stamp distribution by state.
• Is hunger in America a “myth”? A former Montana state legislator makes the argument in an op-ed in the Great Falls Tribune.
• And here’s one economist’s argument against raising the minimum wage.

What are you reading and watching on poverty in America? And what are your thoughts about media coverage of poverty? 

Updated at 10:05 a.m. ET: LONDON -- Two U.S. reports published Tuesday provide significant insights into President Obama’s personal and controversial role in the escalating covert U.S. drone war in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.

In a major extract from Daniel Klaidman’s forthcoming book Kill Or Capture, the author reveals extensive details of how secret U.S. drone strikes have evolved under Obama – and how the president knew of civilian casualties from his earliest days in office.

The New York Times has also published a key investigation exploring how the Obama Administration runs its secret 'Kill List' – the names of those chosen for execution by CIA and Pentagon drones outside the conventional battlefield.

---

The Times' report also reveals that President Obama "embraced" a broadening of the term "civilian", helping to limit any public controversy over "non-combatant" deaths.

As the Bureau's own data on Pakistan makes clear, the very first covert drone strikes of the Obama presidency, just three days after he took office, resulted in civilian deaths in Pakistan. As many as 19 civilians – including four children – died in two error-filled attacks.

Until now it had been thought that Obama was initially unaware of the civilian deaths. Bob Woodward has reported that the president was only told by CIA chief Michael Hayden that the strikes had missed their High Value Target but had killed "five al Qaeda militants."

Read more stories from The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

Now Newsweek correspondent Daniel Klaidman reveals that Obama knew about the civilian deaths within hours. He reports an anonymous participant at a subsequent meeting with the president: "You could tell from his body language that he was not a happy man." Obama is described aggressively questioning the tactics used.

Yet despite the errors, the president ultimately chose to keep in place the CIA’s controversial policy of using "signature strikes" against unknown militants. That tactic has just been extended to Yemen.

'Covert' US drone operation is mapped on Twitter

On another notorious occasion, the article reveals that U.S. officials were aware at the earliest stage that civilians – including "dozens of women and children" – had died in Obama’s first ordered strike in Yemen in December 2009. The Bureau recently named all 44 civilians killed in that attack by cruise missiles.

'I'd have to go to confession'
No U.S. officials have ever spoken publicly about the strike, although secret diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks proved that the U.S. was responsible. Now Klaidman reveals that Jeh Johnson, one of the State Department’s senior lawyers, watched the strike take place with others on a video screen:

"Johnson returned to his Georgetown home around midnight that evening, drained and exhausted. Later there were reports from human-rights groups that dozens of women and children had been killed in the attacks, reports that a military source involved in the operation termed “persuasive.” Johnson would confide to others, “If I were Catholic, I’d have to go to confession.”

Klaidman describes a world in which the CIA and Pentagon constantly push for significant attacks on the U.S.’s enemies. In March 2009, for example, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen reportedly called for the bombing of an entire training camp in southern Somalia in order to kill one militant leader.

Pakistan official: US drone strike hits mosque; 10 killed

One dissenter at the meeting is said to have described the tactic as "carpet-bombing a country." The attack did not go ahead.

Obama is generally described as attempting to rein back both the CIA and the Pentagon. But in the case of Anwar al-Awlaki – "Obama’s Threat Number One" – different rules applied.

According to Klaidman, Obama let it be known that he would consider allowing civilian deaths if it meant killing the U.S.-Yemeni cleric. "Bring it to me and let me decide in the reality of the moment rather than in the abstract," an aide recalls him saying. No civilians died that day, as it turned out.

In its own major investigation, the New York Times examines the secret US 'Kill List' – the names of those chosen for death at the hands of US drones. The report is based on interviews with more than 36 key individuals with knowledge of the scheme.

Drone spotting at secret Nevada base stirs up debate

The Times' report says:

"[Obama's] first term has seen private warnings from top officials about a 'Whac-A-Mole' approach to counterterrorism; the invention of a new category of aerial attack following complaints of careless targeting; and presidential acquiescence in a formula for counting civilian deaths that some officials think is skewed to produce low numbers."

It is often been reported that President Obama has urged officials to avoid wherever possible the deaths of civilians in covert U.S. actions in Pakistan and elsewhere. But reporters Jo Becker and Scott Shane reveal that Obama "embraced" a formula understood to have been devised by the Bush administration:

"Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent."

So concerned have some officials been by this "false accounting" that they have taken their concerns direct to the White House, according to the New York Times.

Photos document alleged US drone strike victims in Pakistan

The revelation helps explain the wide variation between credible reports of civilian deaths in Pakistan by the Bureau and others, and the CIA’s claims that it had killed no "non-combatants" between May 2010 and September 2011 – and possibly later.

The investigation also reveals that more than 100 U.S. officials take part in a weekly "death list" video conference run by the Pentagon, at which it is decided who will be added to the U.S. military’s kill/ capture lists. "A parallel, more cloistered selection process at the CIA focuses largely on Pakistan, where that agency conducts strikes," the paper reports.

But according to at least one former senior administration official, Obama’s obsession with targeted killings is "dangerously seductive." Retired admiral Dennis Blair, the former US Director of National Intelligence, told the paper that the campaign was:

"The politically advantageous thing to do — low cost, no US casualties, gives the appearance of toughness. It plays well domestically, and it is unpopular only in other countries. Any damage it does to the national interest only shows up over the long term."

 

Clarification: An earlier version of this story said that President Obama "personally authorized the broadening of the term 'civilian'" and attributed the redefining of "civilian" to his administration. However, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism now understands that the Obama administration instead embraced a pre-existing policy introduced under President George W. Bush. The Bureau apologizes for this error.

More world news from msnbc.com and NBC News:

• Greek tragedy: Economic crisis sparks brain drain
• Teenager allegedly held as slave in Bosnia for years
• Britain's PM eats humble pie over snack tax
• Brother of doctor who worked with CIA in bin Laden hunt seeks US protection

Follow us on Twitter: @msnbc_world

 

Potential candidates for New York City mayor are taking stands on the police department’s surveillance of Muslim students, ranging from support to worry that the police department may be violating civil liberties, the Associated Press has reported.

The NYPD used undercover officers and informants to infiltrate Muslim student groups at colleges across the Northeast. The monitoring was part of the department's anti-terrorism efforts. Officers tracked student websites and blogs, monitoring who was communicating with the groups. On one occasion, an undercover officer was sent on a whitewater rafting trip with students from the City College of New York.

---

The AP’s investigation has triggered an uproar among civil liberties activists, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who leaves office after the 2013 election, has said that he finds "worrisome" the idea that his successor might abandon NYPD policies that have kept New Yorkers safe.

New York City Comptroller John C. Liu, who is expected to run for mayor, warned that "we should not as a matter of policy profile people based on religion or race — it goes against everything this city stands for."

Liu, a Queens Democrat, faces a federal investigation into his fundraising operation after reports of inconsistencies in his campaign finances.

At a hearing in October, New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said that a department squad called the Demographics Unit mapped the city’s Muslim population, according to The New York Times. 

Councilmembers at the hearing said they worried New Yorkers' civil liberties were being violated.

“It looks like we are targeting Muslim neighborhoods and communities,” Councilman Brad Lander said at the time. “That’s not good for us. We have people out there who are partners who feel the trust is betrayed.”

The Associated Press and The New York Times contributed to this report.

More content from msnbc.com and NBC News

• Apple tops list of most profitable stores in America
• More California teachers accused of sex crimes
• Carnival Magic rescues crew worker who jumped off cruise ship
• US cites Harvard medical research facility