G
gilliam
Guest
The chief of CNN’s editorial board is self distructing:
The full picture?
Posted by Mary Madigan
In October 2002, CNN’s news chief Eason Jordan told Franklin Foer of The New Republic that his network gave “a full picture” of Saddam’s regime." He challenged Foer to find instances of CNN neglecting stories about Saddam’s horrors.
In April 2003, Jordan admitted in a New York Times op-ed that CNN had learned some “awful things” about the Saddam’s regime that they were afraid to print for fear of losing access to live camera feeds.
Jordan, who downplayed the crimes of Saddam’s regime, is now speculating, without any proof, in a very public forum, that members of the American military targeted and murdered a dozen journalists.
According to Rony Abovitz
During one of the discussions about the number of journalists killed in the Iraq War, Eason Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by US troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-US crowd) and cause great strain on others.
Due to the nature of the forum, I was able to directly challenge Eason, asking if he had any objective and clear evidence to backup these claims, because if what he said was true, it would make Abu Ghraib look like a walk in the park. David Gergen was also clearly disturbed and shocked by the allegation that the U.S. would target journalists, foreign or U.S. He had always seen the U.S. military as the providers of safety and rescue for all reporters.
Eason seemed to backpedal quickly, but his initial statements were backed by other members of the audience (one in particular who represented a worldwide journalist group). The ensuing debate was (for lack of better words) a real “sh–storm”. What intensified the problem was the fact that the session was a public forum being taped on camera, in front of an international crowd.
Hugh Hewitt has more…
While Jordan’s statement may not cause as much damage as Noam Chomsky’s statement that the U.S. intended to ‘casually starve’ a million Afghans to death in a “silent genocide”, it seems to come from the same impulse. Downplaying the crimes of dictators while exaggerating, or making up ‘facts’ about crimes committed by the United States is passive aggressive form of attack that some seem to find habit-forming.
UPDATE: According to Instapundit, foreign journalists aren’t corroborating Jordan.
Of course, the Guardian has a history of repeating what Jordan says, verbatim, but they’ll believe anything.
As to the question of why established professionals like Eason feel that they have to make stuff up, commenter ZF says:
The common thread, it seems to me, is that these are all 60’s liberal white males having some sort of mid-life crisis which has impelled them to invent a grandiose, exaggerated and heroic version of their past. Maybe we should look at this as a male version of cosmetic surgery?
Sounds about right
michaeltotten.com/archives/000726.html
The full picture?
Posted by Mary Madigan
In October 2002, CNN’s news chief Eason Jordan told Franklin Foer of The New Republic that his network gave “a full picture” of Saddam’s regime." He challenged Foer to find instances of CNN neglecting stories about Saddam’s horrors.
In April 2003, Jordan admitted in a New York Times op-ed that CNN had learned some “awful things” about the Saddam’s regime that they were afraid to print for fear of losing access to live camera feeds.
Jordan, who downplayed the crimes of Saddam’s regime, is now speculating, without any proof, in a very public forum, that members of the American military targeted and murdered a dozen journalists.
According to Rony Abovitz
During one of the discussions about the number of journalists killed in the Iraq War, Eason Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by US troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-US crowd) and cause great strain on others.
Due to the nature of the forum, I was able to directly challenge Eason, asking if he had any objective and clear evidence to backup these claims, because if what he said was true, it would make Abu Ghraib look like a walk in the park. David Gergen was also clearly disturbed and shocked by the allegation that the U.S. would target journalists, foreign or U.S. He had always seen the U.S. military as the providers of safety and rescue for all reporters.
Eason seemed to backpedal quickly, but his initial statements were backed by other members of the audience (one in particular who represented a worldwide journalist group). The ensuing debate was (for lack of better words) a real “sh–storm”. What intensified the problem was the fact that the session was a public forum being taped on camera, in front of an international crowd.
Hugh Hewitt has more…
While Jordan’s statement may not cause as much damage as Noam Chomsky’s statement that the U.S. intended to ‘casually starve’ a million Afghans to death in a “silent genocide”, it seems to come from the same impulse. Downplaying the crimes of dictators while exaggerating, or making up ‘facts’ about crimes committed by the United States is passive aggressive form of attack that some seem to find habit-forming.
UPDATE: According to Instapundit, foreign journalists aren’t corroborating Jordan.
Of course, the Guardian has a history of repeating what Jordan says, verbatim, but they’ll believe anything.
As to the question of why established professionals like Eason feel that they have to make stuff up, commenter ZF says:
The common thread, it seems to me, is that these are all 60’s liberal white males having some sort of mid-life crisis which has impelled them to invent a grandiose, exaggerated and heroic version of their past. Maybe we should look at this as a male version of cosmetic surgery?
Sounds about right
michaeltotten.com/archives/000726.html
