>>But the FBI told WBZ that reporting such a story would be reckless and could put lives in danger..."``You're alerting adversaries to what weaknesses there are.''
Hmm...Yes, maybe there was concern of terrorists/ enemies of the state pouncing on security flaws. But you also have the FBI pressuring a news outlet to kill a story--what's more important, our security or the press being able to cover a story like this (if it indeed is true)? A "slippery slope", to use a talkradio expression, here.
>>whether higher-ups actually liked the story and opted to hold it until a period when ratings would be higher perhaps September.
So, ratings a high motive? Remember this station is owned by CBS/Viacom/Infinity!
>>As one staffer put it, embarrassing management is generally not the best way to keep your job.
That's for sure.
I thought only ladies with chronic diahrea were named Flo.
This sounds like another reporter too full of herself to stop and think for a minute. I listen to WBZ every morning. They take much of the CBS anti-Bush crap right off the wire and read it. It had me chocking on my Cheerios during the election.
I can understand the FBI's position but I would have asked them to delay the story until the FBI could start the process of closing the security holes. I hope the FBI will be proactive and fix those flaws anyway.