Stock Market at an 11-year low...anyone notice?

I'm surprised that the fact that the stock market—at least the S&P 500, a much better measure than the Dow—is now at an 11 year low after Thursday's plunge?

You'd think breaking below the 2002-2003 lows would cause a bit of ruckus. After all, the "five year lows!" headlines were omnipresent in October. Now that we're at the lowest point in the S&P 500 since mid-April 1997, I'm seeing little or nothing about it, except a few notes that "intraday lows touched levels not seen since 1997." I hate to break it to you, but the CLOSE was an 11 year low.

A search for "stock market" in Google News right now yields 254,000 hits. A search for "stock market 11-year low" yields 259. Less than 1 in 1,000 stories from yesterday reference this stunning fact.

Maybe it's because the Dow isn't quite there yet. Its 2002 low was a big lower that its current level. It's sad that the financial press and public still pays attention to such an unrepresentative kludge of a market index. Back in the heady late 90s when the Nasdaq is all many cared about I though that the Dow was on its way—properly—to becoming a relic, since the half of the public not tech-stock crazy was mad about index funds, specifically S&P500 index funds. As the public became more educated, I felt the Dow would become like the British House of Lords, there for pomp and circumstance but leaving the real power to the S&P 500, or even the Wilshire 5000.

But we still see "Dow down by XXX points" headlines with references to the percentage drop only later. We still see poor analysis of why the market fell, why it rose (in recent weeks, anyone who claims to truly know why the market did what it did on a certain day is crazy), and when a bottom will form.

I don't like sensationalism of the market in news stories. Except when you hit a decade low. Then that should be headline news.