Self-righteous, powerful, and with his own media empire? Okay, there are a few of those? He also happens to be a brilliant writer and a fastidious reporter. A stickler for accuracy and journalistic integrity, Steven Brill is one of America's most famous watchdogs. He recently shifted his eyes towards the media with his latest creation, Brill's Content magazine, which was launched in the summer of 1998.

Known for his sarcasm, temper, and ruthlessly competitive nature, Brill is said to have bitten an opponent during a 'friendly' water polo game with co-workers. Perhaps this brutal straightforwardness is what engenders Brill's uncanny ability (and undying compulsion) to expose hypocrisy-Brill is completely devoted to his own explicit concept of journalistic integrity. Born in Queens, New York, Brill attended boarding school at the prestigious Deerfield Academy in Massachusetts, then went to Yale for both undergraduate and law school. While at the nation's most prestigious law school, Brill was notoriously absent from class - as he spent most of his time in New York working for Mayor John Lindsay and writing for New York magazine. Eschewing the practice of law, Brill became a full time writer after graduation; penning articles for New York and Esquire magazines. He also published The Teamsters, a best-selling book on union corruption.

In 1979, Brill co-founded The American Lawyer, an irreverent magazine once referred to as the 'National Enquirer of the Law.' One of the first publications to offer comprehensive, critical coverage of the legal profession, the magazine has consistently been known to both engross and enrage its readers with its accusatory, often devastating and extremely well-researched articles. In it, Brill has exposed some of the country's most powerful lawyers, judges, law schools and corporations. The American Lawyer was twice a winner of the National Magazine Award, and a number of its articles are now required law-school reading. Of course, as the publication became an industry standard, it seemed to soften a bit - hard-nosed articles were often balanced with more favorable pieces celebrating rich and powerful figures in the legal world. Not surprisingly, Brill's own integrity came into question at this point. How could he criticize people who were clearly now his friends? This was exacerbated when he began hosting expensive seminars on law firm management, featuring blue-chip corporate lawyers - the very people that he criticized relentlessly in his magazine.

~ In 1985, Brill decided to expand on the popularity of The American Lawyer and build himself a publishing empire. He created a holding company, called American Lawyer Newspapers Corp., and began acquiring regional legal and business journals including the New Jersey Law Review, the Miami Review, and the Texas Lawyer. He also made a deal with Simon and Schuster for the publication of books under an imprint titled Am-Law Books. In 1989, Time Warner acquired the holding company, which was now called American Lawyer Media. Two years later the media megalith backed Brill in the founding of Court TV, a 24-hour cable network that broadcasts live trials - and in this litigious age has become the stomping ground for lawyer-celebrities like Johnnie Cochrane, Jr.

Eventually, however, there was trouble in paradise between Brill and Big Media. He consistently revolted against Time Warner's attempts to influence editorial content - most notable an instance when one of the conglomerate's executives asked him to cut a story that might endanger the company's pending merger with Turner Broadcasting. In February 1997, after a failed attempt to buy back the American Lawyer properties, Brill accepted $20 million from Time Warner and walked away. He gave up his options in Court TV, as well as his 20 percent stake in American Lawyer Media and Court TV's online component, Counsel Connect.

Brill used the money to fund his latest journalism enterprise, Brill's Content. After harassing lawyers for almost 20 years, he decided to take a crack at the media. The magazine was introduced in the summer of 1998; and teasers sent to prospective subscribers read: "Name the industry that? actually makes lawyers look good - the media." The prototype issue used to woo subscribers and generate a buzz included articles about why television networks rarely make corrections, and listed the "10 laziest White House reporters." The actual debut issue featured Brill's much-touted 27,000-word cover story accusing the media of prostrating itself before independent counsel Kenneth Starr and ruthlessly went so far as to determine a select group of journalists whom he dubbed 'Starr's lapdogs'.

~ Brill stated in a letter to his readers that he wants to "hold journalists accountable, it's time we embarrass them into doing their jobs the way they're supposed to - with integrity, honesty, fairness, and accuracy." Regarding fairness, three days after the memorial service for John F. Kennedy, Jr. and Carolyn Bessett, Brill sent a proposal to 150 of the top media companies, encouraging the press to "back off from covering grieving families, including children, in the immediate wake of personal tragedy." The proposition was met with mixed responses from editors.

Brill has proclaimed himself the media watchdog in a time when the industry is facing innumerable changes. With the declining trust of the media from the public, Brill's magazine has created a forum for criticizing the media. Proclaiming itself as the "Independent Voice of the Information Age," Brill's Content targets readers involved in the media and evaluates media coverage and journalistic practices. In the premier issue that was released more than a year ago, Stephen Brill explained the purpose of the publication: "By exposing the bias, the imbalance, the inaccuracies, the untruths - while praising those who get it right - I hope to hold the media to strict new standards we can all benefit from."

With one year under its belt, the magazine has done just that. With the Internet making a stage for instant communication, Brill claims that the fast competition for new angles on stories has resulted in sloppy reporting. In Brill's August edition, an article pointed out inaccuracies in a Washington Post story, and the magazine pointed a similar finger towards an article in Time magazine, claiming the writer didn't get the facts straight.

Of course, Brill has been treated to some criticism in return, as well as to some questions pointing to the conflicting interests that lurk in his own closet. Brill allows cigarette advertising in Brill's Content, and independently was an open supporter of President Clinton in 1996. But anyone willing to chew on a water polo player should be able to stomach some criticism.