[An Inconvenient Truth, by Al Gore]
When all is said and done, AIT and global
Posted on 03/17/2007 5:52:30 AM PDT by theothercheek
Don't forget the ongoing Plame scandal -- oe of the phoniest, most wishful, most pathetic, most cooked-up and warmed-over news stories going. But you'd think from listening to ABC news that they are covering Watergate.
They ARE covering Watergate - the whole point of this thing was for journalists to be able to say they brought down another Republican president.
The Initial "reporting" about Afghanistan in 2001, the coverage of the Invasion of Iraq in 2003, Abu Graibe, Fallugha, The Downing Street Memo, Fritzmus, Katerina, the daily hype about Global Warming, Hetosexual Aids, Smoking or Food Nazi propaganda, the fraudulent reporting from the Lebanon War etc etc etc.
Apparently what this pseudo intellectual pretending to be "a Journalist" is doing is simply defining anything he personally disagrees with as "fake News"
Here is the difference. The News provided by the Govt was designed to counter erroneous propaganda being reported as "news". It was not "fake" is was news from a different point of view. The above list is just a few of the stores reported as "news" by "Journalists" that was not just "a different point of view" by knowing reported as "Fact" despite having NO bases in any factual reality.
So I suggest the J school clowns clean up their fraudulent industry rather then accuse others of what THEY have prov en repeatedly of producing.
I'm shocked!
Those VNRs that he goes on and on about are a standard PR tool. It is assumed by both the PR agencies and the government that any TV station airing the VNR (or posting it on its Web site) will identify its source and not try to pass it off as its own work product. The producers of the VNRs are not the ones at fault here, it's the managing editors of these TV stations who are lacking in ethics. Imagine how many VNRs for products - like pharmaceuticals - are passed off as news every day. That's the real scandal here, not tbe administration trying to counter institutional news bias with some innocuous PR tactics.
You must familiar with The St. Pete Slimes and their owner (Non Profit Foundation) The Poynter Institute -- for training 'journalists.'
This has nothing to do with bringing down a president. This has all been designed to keep Chaney from resigning and being replaced by Codi Rice.
That has always been Clinton's worse nightmare. By cooking up this false story they have forced Chaney to stay as VP because he knows if he resigns and is just a private citizen he will no longer be protected from Democrat witch hunts.
Exactly. The MSM is nothing but wall to wall liberal propaganda. They use an occasional 'George Will' who's kind of odd anyway, as an example of their dedication to show both sides. But they really don't.
Conservative ideas are not respected. The MSM loses more credibility every year.
This Valerie Plame thing started just as Bush's re-election campaign was in full swing. The original leaker was thought to be Rove and even before a special prosecutor was named to investigate people were calling for Rove to resign. The idea was to throw Bush's campaign into such disarray that Kerry would win. And while Condi Rice may be Hill's worst nightmare way back when, another equally scary nightmare has now emerged in the person of Obama.
This Valerie Plame thing started just as Bush's re-election campaign was in full swing. The original leaker was thought to be Rove and even before a special prosecutor was named to investigate people were calling for Rove to resign. The idea was to throw Bush's campaign into such disarray that Kerry would win. And while Condi Rice may be Hill's worst nightmare way back when, another equally scary nightmare has now emerged in the person of Obama.
I still vote for "Y2 Kohoutek", a combination of Y2K happening while the Earth was being swallowed by the tail of a comet. And that was before Karl Rove invented the hurricane machine.
As a professor at Columbia school of journalism, he exists inside the leftist-liberal political bubble that dominates the LameStreamMedia. When you are so used to your own stench, you do not smell it. The major media "news" IS fake news. It is one single political editorial masquerading as "news".
Oddly, he DID mentioned those doctored photos. Probably because they were done by non-American stringers that Reuters and AP had hired (i.e., not the product of American J-schools - though they could have been). But Gugna Dan is a journalistic hero for "standing up" to Richard Nixon. But if you remember Dano's interview with Saddam, he was licking the dictator's arse Big Time because unlike Nixon, Saddam could pull out a gun and shoot him between the eyes if he got pissed off.
He left out that mostly he only mentions fake news as coming from conservative's.
So he is also a maker of fake and misleading news.
Yes. Of course. However, the problem is far deeper than journalism. I think it's a near-universal failing and a part of the human condition.
It is a rare person who has an uncompromising commitment to accuracy, objectivity, and ethics.
How many people are uncompromisingly accurate and objective--not to mention ethical?
"Does this dress make me look fat?" You're going to say, "Yes"?
"How are you?" "Fine."
Okay. So much for amenities.
How long would it take to give an uncompromisingly accurate and objective statement of one's opinion of some philosophical point, moral dilemma, world situation, etc., and how tedious would it become?
What about an explanation of something like Einstein's theories or St. Augustine's Confessions or Van Gogh's paintings or what it was like during the civil war in Liberia or how Muslims feel about 9/11 or how the Democrat and Republican Parties are alike and differ?
It's hard--maybe impossible--to be uncompromisingly accurate and objective, even in our daily lives and even if we are committed to it and are uncompromisingly ethical.
In fact, it may be easier to be uncompromisingly ethical than uncompromisingly accurate and objective.
This is not to suggest that journalists--or non-journalists who have a reason to distort the news--are committed to accuracy, objectivity, or ethics. Obviously many intentionally distort what is reported.
What I'm saying is that they do so in addition to a widespread--and maybe universal--human failure to be and possibly an inability to be uncompromisingly accurate, objective, and ethical.
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.