Posted on 11/25/2016 1:39:42 PM PST by Kaslin
One blog on the inanities in CNN anchor Christiane Amanpour's impassioned address at the Committee to Protect Journalists dinner against granting any respect to conservatives in the "news" media product is not enough. In a second look at the transcript, one can see how Amanpour complained that Hillary Clinton was judged by an "exceptionally high bar" and Trump an "exceptionally low bar."
She also insisted, as many at CNN do, that the fact-based journalist never accepts a rebuttal on the "empirical scientific evidence" of global warming.
During an interview on my program this summer, the film-maker and historian Ken Burns asked me what would Edward R. Murrow do?
First, like many people watching where I was overseas, I admit I was shocked by the exceptionally high bar put before one candidate and the exceptionally low bar put before the other candidate.
It appeared much of the media got itself into knots trying to differentiate between balance, objectivity, neutrality, and crucially, truth.
We cannot continue the old paradigm--let's say like over global warming, where 99.9 percent of the empirical scientific evidence is given equal play with the tiny minority of deniers.
I learned long ago, covering the ethnic cleansing and genocide in Bosnia, never to equate victim with aggressor, never to create a false moral or factual equivalence, because then you are an accomplice to the most unspeakable crimes and consequences.
I believe in being truthful, not neutral. And I believe we must stop banalizing the truth.
"Truthful, not neutral" is an Amanpour slogan. It's a wonderful motto for arrogant liberal bias. Liberalism is the "truth," conservatism is "falsehood," and so one should be celebrated, and the other pounded into dust. For example, Amanpour in this address compares the Trump/conservative side of the debate not only to falsehood, but as comparable to pracitioners of "ethnic cleansing and genocide," as well as the tyrants who would crush the "Arab Spring.
setup:
And we have to be prepared to fight especially hard for the truth in a world where the Oxford English Dictionary just announced its word of 2016: post-truth.
We have to accept that we've had our lunch handed to us by the very same social media that we've so slavishly been devoted to.
The winning candidate did a savvy end run around us and used it to go straight to the people. Combined with the most incredible development ever--the tsunami of fake news sites--aka lies--that somehow people could not, would not, recognize, fact check, or disregard.
One of the main writers of these false articles--these lies--says people are getting dumber, just passing fake reports around without fact checking. We need to ask whether technology has finally outpaced our human ability to keep up.
Trump voters are "dumber" voters prone to "hate speech." Does this strike anyone as someone who learned something about her political opponents in this last election? Or does it sound like the usual doubling-down? Conservatives are also pushing a "post-values world," she claimed:
Now, more than ever, we need to commit to real reporting across a real nation, a real world in which journalism and democracy are in mortal peril, including by foreign powers like Russia paying to churn out and place false news, and hacking into democratic systems here and allegedly in upcoming crucial German and French elections too....
We must also fight against a post-values world.
And let me hit back at this elitist backlash we're all bending over backwards to accommodate.
Since when were American values elitist values? They are not left or right values. They are not rich or poor values, not the forgotten-man values....
So yes, like so many around the world, I was shocked--very few ever imagined that so many Americans conducting their sacred duty in the sanctity of the voting booth, with their secret ballot, would be angry enough to ignore the wholesale vulgarity of language, the sexual predatory behavior, the deep misogyny, the bigoted and insulting views.
Like many Clinton-adoring journalists, "Truthful" Amanpour never acknowledges Bill Clinton was credibly accused of sexually predatory behiavior. In the year Clinton was impeached, Amanpour married Clinton State Department spokesman Jamie Rubin, who also worked for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign in 2008.
After Clinton was impeached for lying in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, Amanpour gushed all over Hillary Clinton for her suffering, instead of demanding the truth about how she defended her husband's misogyny: "A lot of the women that I meet from traveling overseas are very impressed by you and admire your dignity. A lot of the people you meet are people who’ve suffered, people you saw today, and who believe that they identify with you, because they have seen you suffer.”
That's "truthful"? It's certainly not neutral. Amanpour claimed that she was a guardian of American values and ripped Laura Ingraham for suggesting otherwise:
If not, I will fight as a journalist--as we all must--to defend and protect the unique value system that makes these United States--and with which it seeks to influence the world.
The conservative radio host who may be the next White House press secretary says mainstream media is hostile to traditional values.
I would say it's just the opposite. And have you read about the "Heil, victory" meeting in Washington, DC this past weekend? Why aren't there more stories about the dangerous rise of the far right here and in Europe? Since when did anti-Semitism stop being a litmus test in this country? We must fights against normalization of the unacceptable.
Amanpour then mentioned the Brexit vote, where she also championed the Left and disparaged the Right.
Blithering Hag.
She must have fallen and hit her head... five or six times.
I’ve never seen a lower bar for any political figure.
Thirty to forty felony level crimes, and not a questioning word from the MSM.
Yeah... high bar. LOL
“...the Committee to Protect Journalists...”
Ha! There were no “journalists” at this meeting. Goebbel’s Third Reich flag should’ve flown outside the hall.
Christiane, did you mean one candidate was wrong & criminal and the other was blameless? Tell us what you really mean.
I’ll admit that I held Hillary to an unreasonably high standard.
I condemned Hillary for mishandling Top Secret/SCI materials in a manner that would have sent me to prison for decades.
I condemned Hillary for using an unsecure email system for transmitting sensitive information that got fifteen Navy SEALs killed in Afghanistan and four Americans killed in Benghazi, and who knows how many others from our military and the CIA killed throughout the world.
I condemned Hillary for selling access to our government in a manner that netted her a fortune, taking her from “dead broke” to $110 million in sixteen years.
I condemned Hillary for personally attacking and destroying a 12 y/o rape victim in order to acquit a man she knew was guilty, and for her attacks on her husband’s multiple rape victims.
I condemned Hillary for coordinating with CNN in the debates to beat Bernie, with the media as a whole in other debates and throughout the campaign, and with the Justice Department in their investigations of her many crimes to hide as much as possible and time the release of everything else for late on Friday before a holiday to miss the news cycle.
I condemned Hillary for having no qualifications at all for the White House, other than perhaps First Vagina, a qualification so weak even Bill Clinton wouldn’t go there.
I’ll admit that blaming Hillary for all of this was unreasonable. Hillary would have been historic, and that is far more important than whether she was qualified, whether she had the character for the job, or her actual (shockingly destructive) positions on all issues.
Amanpour is a has-been who never was.
Amanpour is a has-been who never was.
Amanpour is a freaking Muslim foreigner. She has no idea about American freedom nor the values of the Republic she in which she squats.
Love the Missing Jeb on the milk carton.
[She’s been a Muslim/Iran sympathizer since I’ve seen her on TV.
Anti-American thru and thru.]
And, as I recall, anti-Israel using the Palestinian propaganda machine kept in place by other ME states.
The bar is set pretty low for democrats. They had to lower it even more to even consider a hillary run.
Very well-stated. Thanks. Hillaryous Rotten Criminal and her POS enablers ALERT!
We warned Hillary to stay out of “bars” but NOOOO, the arrogant putz just had to go out at night.
..... Actually an extremely true statement ........ if she is doing the Limbo!!!
And this was exactly where CNN learned that Aman was untrustworthy, that she could not be relied upon to tell both sides, and the Bosnian conflict was where she jumped the shark, never to recover. Since Bosnia:
FWIW, Aman blocked me two years ago. Badge of honor.
“like over global warming, where 99.9 percent of the empirical scientific evidence”
So they’re not 100% sure.
They were 90% sure Hillary would be our next President. How’d that work out?
ML/NJ
Yeah a high bar was set for Hillary, like loving your country above all others, don’t lie and don’t sell out your country because you want money. Yeah a real high bar, truth and honesty, something that is usually taught in kindergarten.
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.