Posted on 02/06/2005 6:28:15 AM PST by Valin
"Hmmmm. Ok. I'll bite.
1. "we are entering an era of informational accountability."
Sixty plus years of network news. A century or more of modern journalism. Several decades of ethical thought and education in journalism school.
And only NOW are we entering into an "era of informational accountability"? I'd suggest that this makes a much more powerful statment than is probably otherwise intended.
2. "Right wing bloggers: are you holding our leaders to the same standard of accountability that we are now holding Eason Jordan"
Are you holding left-wing bloggers to the same level of accountability that you're holding right-wing bloggers to? I can't say that I've noticed Atrios or Kos following that particular "Blogger Code of Ethics". Please explain how you can be attempting to use that standard to judge right-wing bloggers when the left-wing bloggers don't even ackknowledge it. I must point out that this is a common tactic of the left. Create an artificial standard and then apply it solely to the right-wing all the while ignoring any and all infractions of this, artificial, standard by anyone on the left. We can see it every single day with an example of Howard Kurtz of CNN. Kurtz spent a great deal of time and effort to show conservative pundits in a bad light, yet nothing even comparable is done to anyone on the left.
Such is the partisan hackery in the MSM today.
3. As for the "Blogger Code of Ethics". When the foaming-at-the-mouth brigade of left-wing bloggers adopt it, and really adopt it and not just a symbolic gesture that is immediately ignored, let me know. Then I'll consider it.
4. As for President Bush and WMDs. Let me also point out the huge number of Democratic Senators who are ON RECORD that Iraq had WMDs, that Iraq was dangerous and that Saddam had to be dealt with. This includes Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid and Kerry. Oh and while we're at it why don't we also apply this interesting standard to Clinton, who ostensibly bombed Iraq for the same WMD reason on the day of Lewinsky deliberations in the Senate.
Goose, meet Gander. Gander, Goose.
5. "Admit your mistake, and use your power and capacity as one of the most powerful media figures in the world to turn CNN into a model of ethical, fair, and fact based journalism."
Any idea that Eason as a continuing role at CNN is laughable. As it is now the American MSM has mortally wounded itself in Iraq with it's blatantly false reporting. And CNN, with Amanpour in the lead, heads the pack.
And I'll also point out, again, that this is also indicative of the rampant corruption in the MSM. Unable, or unwilling, to police itself. It puts paid to the lie that the MSM is unbiased.
6. "The philosopher Karl Popper spoke of our inability to ever prove that something was true."
Oh give me a break. When I read philosophical claptrap such as this all I can think is that there is/was someone out there that really needed a good swift kick in the arse. This is right up there with that incredible question: "How can you prove you're hungry".
7. "(a) Do U.S. Troops specifically target American and foreign journalists in Iraq?"
My guess is that the answer is a big fat NO. One of the more important, and signal, directives in Afghanistan was the statement by the American military that they would NOT intervene nor intercede on the behalf of any journalist that got into trouble in Afghanistan. At the time it caused something of a ruckus but the reasoning is quite clear from the history of the Gulf War I.
Journalist do really stupid things in order sex up stories and when they get into deadly trouble, they always call on the military to get them out of the shithole they've dug for themselves. And if a helicopter full of soldiers crashes while rescuing their raggedy arse, well then that's just a tidy little bonus for the j-crew isn't it.
I don't think the question is whether or not American soldier target journalists. It's more of whether or not journalists target American soldiers.
And there is a shitload more evidence for this.
Summary:
Eason Jordan is a pimple on the Great Ass of Journalism. Irrelevant and worthless. He'll be pilloried, racked, burned at the stake and forgotten in a couple weeks. But what won't be forgotten is that the current MSM is already dead, but unaware of it. Amazingly enough it's not bloggers that killed the beast. In fact bloggers are almost completely irrelevant too in this circumstance. No what really killed the current MSM Journalosaur is the American military. Quite ironic isn't it.
No soldier will shoot it dead, but then again they don't have to. Ever since the start of Afghanistan the MSM has played up the negatives and hidden the positives. Even now the successful democracy in Afghanistan has been flushed down the "memory hole". But what cannot be flushed is the combined and cumulative experience of every soldier, marine, sailor and airman who knows the truth, and see the lies spread by the MSM.
As it is now many, if not most, active duty members of the military despise and distrust the MSM. They know the truth, and the truth is not being told. They can see with their own eyes the spin, and the lies. Having lost any trust garnered over the years of childhood, this trust is gone forever and can never be regained. With 100,000+ new members each and every year, the pool of distrustful grows constantly. Then you must add in members of their families, who being apprised of the truth, also distrust the MSM. There are 2.5 million active duty military today. Multiply that by the number of family members potentially influenced by first-hand knowledge.
Then there's the other aspect of military life. That the raw recruit today could spend the next thirty years in uniform. The distrust learned today from a revered NCO, could last his entire career and passed on to each successive generation. And each and every year another 100,000+ are primed for indoctrination.
hehe. Do you think this is new? What do you think has been going on since Reagan took office? Ever wonder why the Democratic Party's problems have become so great in almost exactly twenty years after Reagan's election?
It's a funny world."
Posted by: ed | February 6, 2005 07:32 AM
It's in fact slander, is it not, if he made the remark in reckless disregard for the truth?
THAT'S NOT ME! I'm just your humble poster.
This is a group of people you strated a blog about Davros and just fell into this subject. It's where this whole thing started.
Don't we have a sniper on the job "targeting" him? < /sarcasm >
I just want CNN to report "news" again.
I just want to spend a weekend of cheap meanless sex with the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders.
Which do you think will happen first?
... The military may not have actually targeted journalists in Iraq, but the sentiment behind it all is accurate. </rather>
Eason Jordan – Isn’t this the scoundrel that more or less admitted that CNN did puff pieces on Saddam Hussein in order to stay in Iraq during his rein? NEVER ONCE did CNN report truthfully on the brutal dictatorship’s activities, murder, torture, rape, pillage, plunder, etc., because they feared being kicked out of the country. Why be in the country? The only answer can be they were a willing propaganda arm of Saddam’s rein of terror.
Personally I want CNN to carry on in their present and past mode. It will ensure Darwin’s theory of evolution takes place. They will fade into the dustbin of history.
Who said conservatives only think in terms of black and white?
Actually, if we had been tagging CNN people with tracking devices we'd have gotten Osama and his cohorts long ago. CNN always used to be able to find the bad guys for interviews when our intel folks couldn't.
Cheerleaders
Eason Jordan – Isn’t this the scoundrel that more or less admitted that CNN did puff pieces on Saddam Hussein in order to stay in Iraq during his rein?
No more or less about it, he said it.
And what happened to him?....nothing.
I believe Dr. Tom Sowell dubbed the media the "jackal pack press," and it's a fitting title.
This guy is an idiot.
We went to Iraq to call Sadam's hand. Even if Sadam was bluffing it did not matter either way, he would have his cards on the table.
The mission was valid, as everyone knew the only way to find out for sure was to actually check.
Sorry...but if you do folowm it, and keep posting from it..still ping me..
Friggin no-account dilletant, whatever schlubb wrote this is not interested in Truth, Justice or the American Way.
Mucho Gusto for that summary -- to you and ed. Edifying and now I don't have any reason to read any more of the wanker's whining.
Ed wrote it, not me. Would that I could write so well.:)
or just simply stop making up sh*t for your lard butt socialist bosses and their hippie wannabie eclectic vote block mobs
Too late now. He either backs-up what he said, or we begin the furious attack and send him packing.
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.