Posted on 05/17/2005 9:24:40 AM PDT by Spacewolfomega
You can call Newsweek to voice your complaints at (212)445-4000. Demand that the magazine be held accountable by requesting that Isikoff either be fired or his resignation accepted. If you or your business have a subscription to Newsweek, threaten cancellation if they do not comply within a week from today (5-17-05). This sort of irresponsible reporting must be accounted for. Only all of our efforts can help bring this about. Thank you.
And it belongs right there in Newsweek, who will forever be tagged with two (2) malfeasances.
1. They foisted a false anti-military and internationally flammable story upon unsuspecting readers, and
2. They chose the Clintonian route of blaming others and only reluctantly, (and minimally) accepting any responsibility.
.
Yes, but you're missing my point. No one advertises in a magazine that has no subscribers.
Newsweek keeps saying it had a "credible source" just like Rather and Mapes insisted they had a credible source. You wonder how "high level" this source was. Do they just take anyone's word for something if the charge is anti-American?
Loss of advertising dollars = angry board of directors and investors. Angry investors = loss of job by publisher and everyone else responsible. Gotta love a market economy! There are other places, (less controversial)for the advertisers to advertise their products and services. They will leave Newsweek with enough pressure, guaranteed!
IMO, he should have held the story until he could see a copy of the actual military report.
If anyone could get their hands on a report like that, it would be Bill Gertz. The report does not exist, and the incident did not happen.
Charges? You've gotta be kidding me. I'd ask you what you think they should be charged with, but I would expect an answer along the lines of "MURDER!" and I'm just not playing that stupid game.
He was BORN, became a pilot, then Gov of Texas and then elected POTUS, then 911 happened, then he invaded Iraq.....then the Koran was abused......ALL BUSH'S FAULT!!!
Some nameless woman in Texas gave it to some disgruntled mental case and from there it was forwarded from a kinko's.
Just like I was for them keeping Dan Blather at SeeBS; I'm for "Newsweak" keeping Isikoff.
What better icon of the left wing bias and lies than the poster boy, Isikoff at "Newsweak!"
Semper Fi,
Kelly
In the wake of CBS' Rathergate, I closed my account with American Express (one of CBS' sponsors). They wrote me and phoned me to find out why.
Well then, if their "credible source" set them up with a lie, that "credible source" should be identified and raked over the coals. Afterall, newsies are supposed to protect their sources of information, not their sources of disinformation.
Isikoff is getting raw deal IMO.
LMAO!!
Interesting question, lugsoul.
Newsweek sells a product that is represented as news, ie. factual information about world events. If they instead provide their customers with disinformation about current events, isn't that false advertising? And even in the unlikely event that they did so unwittingly, don't they owe their customers either a refund for that month's subscription or a refund when they return that issue to the store where they bought it? If what a news consumer really wants is fairy tales about current events, can't he get that for free? Why should he pay a magazine company to give him what he can get for nothing in any bar?
If the answer to the above question is, "No, they should not be held accountable for providing the product they advertise to consumers," then shouldn't Newsweek be required to print a consumer warning label on the product, prominently displayed on the front page?...
Well, if jumping over that conclusion hasn't put you out of earshot, here's my reply.
Incitement to riot is a serious crime; and frankly, given the predictable reaction from the Muslim world, I think a case somewhere in the vicinity of treason (though not necessarily that specific charge) would be appropriate. After all, you'd have to be a complete moron not to know what publicized charges of this nature, whether true or not, would result in. It goes beyond a principled position in opposition to the military activity. It seriously destabilizes any efforts by our nation to proceed constructively in the region.
Maybe you regard the threat of Islam, and it's goal of world domination, to be a game. Some of us have a larger perspective.
knew or should have known
reckless endangerment
depraved indifference to human life
inciting to riot
Far fetched? Maybe. Just how far does freedom of the press extend? If they are tasked with being the "watch dog," then who watches them?
Great minds think alike, wc. See 58.
Say, wc -- haven't news sources been successfully sued for libel in the past? Haven't they been obliged to cough up substantial chunks of award/settlement money to those whose reputations they have harmed? Isn't it actionable when a news publication recklessly causes a citizen (such as a serviceman) to undergo mental anguish, pain and suffering, loss of good reputation, etc?
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.