[Phantom Lord]

I find it hard to believe that there is no video of this event. If there is, roll the tape and that will be the end of it.

[rface]

the issue in a nutshell

I'll leave it others to draw their own verdicts, but here's mine: Whether with malice aforethought or not, Mr. Jordan made a defamatory innuendo. Defamatory innuendo--rather than outright allegation--is the vehicle of mainstream media bias. Had Mr. Jordan's innuendo gone unchallenged, it would have served as further proof to the Davos elite of the depths of American perfidy. Mr. Jordan deserves some credit for retracting the substance of his remark, and some forgiveness for trying to weasel his way out of a bad situation of his own making. Whether CNN wants its news division led by a man who can't be trusted to sit on a panel and field softball questions is another matter.

the issue in a nutshell

[GianniV]

Oh, I love the old cop out, "there are people who believe" line. Of course, he's talking about himself and his beliefs.

It's like when Diane Sawyer/Katie Couric interview a conservative and state, "Somebody say that you're a drooling, uncaring, racist, homophobic monster. How do you respond to that?"

[drt1]

This is only the most recent in a string of ethical and professional missteps for Mr. Eason. As I recall, he was involved in the CNN 'Deal' with Saddam during Gulf I to give selected coverage (i.e., Ignore negative aspects of the Regime in it's coverage) of the Iraq situation in return for access granted to his reporter, Peter Arnette. I think I'm right on this and, this, couped with his other failures should be sufficient grounds for severe sanctions at the minimum. With NN I doubt anything will happen and he'll instead probably be given a raise.

[DCPatriot]

I runnin' out to get my Orville Redenbacker Kettle Korn right now.

This should be very entertaining...watching CNN squirm its way out of this one.

The White House is showing by it's two scathing attacks on the Washington Post this past week that the MSM is not speaking infallibly, and that they'd better learn to report the facts instead of their bias slant.

[LarkNeelie]

(Stephens reports that) Eason said:

"Mr. Jordan observed that of the 60-odd journalists killed in Iraq, 12 had been targeted and killed by coalition forces. He then offered a story of an unnamed Al-Jazeera journalist who had been "tortured for weeks" at Abu Ghraib, made to eat his shoes, and called "Al-Jazeera boy" by his American captors...

Now Stephens characterizes it as:

Whether with malice aforethought or not, Mr. Jordan made a defamatory innuendo. Defamatory innuendo--rather than outright allegation--is the vehicle of mainstream media bias.

Innuendo?? Innuendo is an indirect hint..... this was no "innuendo". What is Stephens thinking to label an outright assertion as "innuendo"??

[Capt. Tom]

The author of the article Bret Stephens is on the WSJ editorial board.

I sent him this e- mail:
If you were there, and heard Mr Eason speak, and are on the newspaper staff,why didn't you break the story.

It appears you sat on your hands until the Internet blogs forced the story out. - Tom

[Question_Assumptions]

I think that Barney Frank actually deserves some praise here, since he questioned the claimes and forced the backpeddling.