Posted on 07/22/2012 12:14:23 PM PDT by centurion316
n television journalism, few reporters are as controversial as Brian Ross of ABC News.
The investigative correspondent has landed major scoops and won prestigious awards for his reporting on the Peace Corps, Solyndra, and U.S. antiterrorism efforts — to name just a few. And yet, he has also produced more high-level haphazard reporting than perhaps any other reporter on television.
Ross came under attack again Friday when he reported that James Holmes, the suspect of today’s theater shooting in Aurora, Colo., may have connections to the tea party — basing that on a single web page that listed an Aurora-based “Jim Holmes” as a member of the Colorado Tea Party Patriots.
-snip-
“Brian Ross lost big time and so did ABC News,” Jay Rosen, an associate professor at New York University’s school of journalism, told POLITICO. “Ross reacted and went on instinct… So strong was this instinct that it overrode common newsroom sense and any innate sense of caution that might be left in Brian Ross.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
BS. It wasn't instinct. It was pure libtard partisanship.
Perhaps his partisanship is so deeply ingrained that it has become instinct?
The media have ruled the U.S.A. for a hundred years. And the media have put us in the mess we are in with the ever growing government (socialism) etc.If we had a real media and not what we have which is democrats/marxist political evangelists posing as reporters then we would have the limited government , freedom and prosperity that is aour birthright in the U.S.A instead of the decline and ballooning debt and growing government . it is the media that has been and is the greatest threat and problem.
Nobody calls them on their lies. Most idiots in the U.S. still believe the MSM. the media smeared Palin, etc and people believe the lies like global warming etc.
Even here many posted on and on about the BP oil “disaster” .Even here I couldn't get people to understand what the media was doing with that BP BS. It was no disaster. If the media hadn't lied about that then why aren't there any stories of the “environmental damage” now . The stories stopped almost immediately after the live video showed them shutting down the spill. This is just one example but there are millions.
It was certainly that, but these guys and gals would sell their own mother into slavery to advance their careers. The media will betray their liberal cause from time to time, but they never betray their own self interest.
Perhaps a multi-million dollar lawsuit against him personally and a second one against ABC might get their attention.
Who believes half the crap these talking heads spout anymore?
Once the MSM sold out and went all in for Obama, their days were over with most folks except the Obama supporters.
Then, QUIETLY apologize (not that it will help the lawsuit much), and count on the apology being missed by most.
That one “awa s...” wips out all of his attaboys
And a major cause is the Liberal slant of the MSM.
Spoken like a true liberal journalist and a**hole.
You are certainly right about that, this was intentional with an assumption that the outcome would be exactly as you suggest. If events prove otherwise, it will be because of the rapid and vigorous challenges raised the media's nemesis, the internet. This is why our leftist government and the MSM are so keen on shutting down the power of a free people with the means to fight these bastards on their own turf.
Anymore you can’t get a gerbalist to mention a suspect’s race, or to even say that s/he’s a suspect: s/he’s a “person of interest.”
Here, however, the alphabet press not only names the suspect but provides his political persuasion. It’s just the usual spinach from ABC, but it could be CBS or NBC.
I would say a years worth of sponsorship fees should cover it, since ABC news betrayed not only the American people, but their sponsors.
Unfortunately, a lot of people still do (and not just Obama supporters). Far too many people are still using the mainstream media as their only source for news.
It always surprises them to see the blatant partisanship when it's pointed out by an alternative source. (Wall Street Journal and Investors Business Daily editorials are especially effective at doing this. I forward them to people regularly.)
The only way this mistake could have been made is to have gone looking for it.
In other words, ALL they knew about the shooter’s background was his name.
So they must have said to themselves, “Look and see if there was anyone in the Tea Party with that name.”
Ignoring the fact that it’s a very common name, and finding a person with that name in the Tea Party and then concluding that it just HAD TO BE the same guy is the essence of an error based on bias.
It’s completely unforgivable.
~ H. L. Mencken (1880 – 1956) Journalist – magazine editor
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.