From the standpoint of being ratings grubbing sensationalists, they are no better than the rest. Their tendency to create a story from any event that happens nearby one of their embeds is transparent.
The military nor the CIA are news reporters. It is my opinion that any organization that calls itself a news source should not selfimpose limitations. By withdrawing from any venue that limits the truth, they help to create a vacuum and we know how nature feels about vacuums.
Was I surprised? Yes and no, I knew that bad things were happening and the press had limited access but I had no idea that they could occur right in front of CNN (or any other news org) and go unreported. When does the press have the right to ignore blatant attrocity in the interest of expediency
They were getting the news out via ambiguity and inuendo? In that case I wonder why the article isn't titled "How we got the truth out with nuance."
And a very good morning to you Mary Anne
Current Events » in reply to And where has the information we have had about Iraq come from?
I have my problems with FOX
The whole thread (37 posts)
- Media confesses it covered up Saddam's evil
- The New Republic published an article on this topic last October
- It's not just the media...
- Good stuff here.
- JHC! what good is access?
- Seems to me...
- And where has the information we have had about Iraq come from?
- I have my problems with FOX
- But buy staying, they gave Sadam legitimacy he did not deserve.
- Well now we know why the media is Bush's lap dog...
- Making Something Simple Complex