Posted on 04/16/2003 3:51:18 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
Tom Brokaw scolded CNN's Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive who late last week confessed that CNN withheld specific information he had about Saddam Hussein's brutality and endangerment of Iraqis CNN employed, suggesting he should have kept his knowledge secret since the revelation now casts doubt on anything CNN reports.
On Tuesday's Late Show, Brokaw told David Letterman that CNN "should have worked harder at conveying" what Jordan knew, but that if you "decide to keep that as a secret for yourself to protect those people and to protect the interests of your company, then you probably ought to keep it secret for a long time because it opens them up now, wherever they go, wherever they're stationed, 'well what are they not telling us now?'"
So much for journalists demanding full disclosure.
Brokaw added that when watching CNN's stories from abroad, "you do wonder, what is the deal that they've made to stay where they are when they get there?"
On the April 15 Late Show, Letterman raised Jordan's disclosure, made in a New York Times op-ed last Friday. Brokaw expressed astonishment: "I was, frankly, quite stunned when I read the piece, that he knew as much as he did. I think that they, that they should have worked harder at conveying some of that. There are ways, I mean, you know, the right thing he did was to protect the interests of the people who could have been in jeopardy if he'd said something. But there are other ways that you can find to convey what he was learning there. And I was just frankly surprised he eventually went public with it, frankly, I mean if you decide to keep that as a secret for yourself to protect those people and to protect the interests of your company, then you probably ought to keep it secret for a long time because it opens them up now wherever they go, wherever they're stationed, 'well what are they not telling us now?'" Letterman wondered: "And does it, to the average American watching CNN, does it now make them look softer than maybe they looked heretofore?" Brokaw replied: "I'm not sure that it makes them look softer necessarily. I wouldn't say that. But you do wonder, what is the deal that they've made to stay where they are when they get there? I'm a strong believer in sunshine, you know, you let the sunshine come in and let people in on what you're doing and why you're doing it the way that you are. You run some risk that way, and then people understand. Now we got thrown out of there, you know, the last time around and CNN was able to stay and we knew that. They were able to stay because the regime wanted to see what was going on in America by tuning into CNN. We understood that was part of the deal. But this arrangement, I think, is going to get a lot of discussion."
It certainly should, though from beyond the New York Post, Washington Times and Fox News Channel it hadn't until Tuesday when the first mainstream major media outlet, the Washington Post, weighed in with a condemnatory editorial. See item #2 below.
And what secrets did Peter Arnett hold when employed by NBC?
Previous CyberAlert items on the Jordan matter:
-- Brit Hume's FNC panel denounced CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan for withholding knowledge he had of Saddam Hussein's brutality. Morton Kondracke recalled that last year Jordan had insisted "that CNN never made journalistic compromises to gain access," but that "is a flat lie." Columnist Charles Krauthammer observed: "It's a classic example of selling your soul for the story. He clearly gave up truth for access." Plus, an excerpt from Jordan's op-ed, what he told a radio interviewer last year in maintaining CNN was not at all compromised, a link to Franklin Foer's New Republic story on media outlets trading truth for access and an example from the MRC archive of how CNN's Nic Robertson insisted that Iraqis have "reverence" for Saddam Hussein. See: http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2003/cyb20030412.asp#5
-- The Fox News Sunday panel, from left to right, castigated CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan for his confession on Friday that he had covered up knowledge he had about Saddam Hussein's brutality. NPR's Juan Williams called Jordan's decision an "outrage," Weekly Standard Publisher Bill Kristal described Jordan's behavior as "just craven" and even NPR correspondent Mara Liasson was troubled: "I think that raises some crucial questions about how media organizations behave in totalitarian governments." http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2003/cyb20030414.asp#4
-- More Eason Jordan material: In a memo to CNN's staff, Jordan defended his withholding of knowledge he had about Saddam Hussein's brutality, Franklin Foer penned an op-ed updating his story on how media outlets traded truth for access in Baghdad, on FNC Fred Barnes, Brit Hume and Jeffrey Birnbaum all chided Jordan, and OpinionJournal.com revealed that four years ago Jordan complained about how the U.S. government was an impediment to CNN establishing a permanent Baghdad bureau. Plus, on the very day of Jordan's confession, a newspaper story noted that CNN, claiming it's "independent," refused to mar itself by letting its news be part of a new U.S. government TV channel in Iraq. See: http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2003/cyb20030415.asp#3
|
|
|
Donate Here By Secure Server
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! Thanks Registered |
This stands out real good.
To the left wing presstitutes like Brokhaw full disclosure is only for those they are against like the American Goverment and the people who support the USA.
It doesn't. If it ever did, it doesn't any more.
As far as I'm concerned that's already the motto for CNN
This doesn't begin to describe Juan's comments on this matter. They let Juan go first on this one and he was as livid as I have seen him on that program - normally he has a deer-in-the-headlights look as Brit Hume tees off on him, but he was genuinely outraged at what CNN had done and basically tore them a new orifice. By the time the discussion got to Brit, he had little to add to what had already been said on the matter. Juan also was genuinely glad to see the scenes of liberation and didn't try to spin them away. I guess there are still a few honest liberals out there, and this added Juan Williams to my short list...
So much for journalists demanding full disclosure.
And so much for the people's right to know. And so much for American public opinion.
Om Rokaw's remarks were mere opportunism.
Michael
Really. Maybe we should rewrite the Freedom of Information Act to include the media!
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.