Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

276 | 277 | 278

 ... 487

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Patrick_Lasswell

Patrick_Lasswell

Portland, OR
January 2003

FEB 12, 2005 05:17 PM

The Rule of Holes applies to news executives as well as to everyone else, and it has has now claimed CNN News Chief Eason Jordan's career. In Davos, Switzerland Jordan made unsupportable and despicable claims that the US military deliberately kills journalists in Iraq. Instead of coming clean and admitting he said something stupid and apologizing to US servicemen for his slander, Eason Jordan kept on digging his hole and claimed he was misunderstood.

CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan quit Friday amid a furor over remarks he made in Switzerland last month about journalists killed by the U.S. military in Iraq. Jordan said he was quitting to avoid CNN being "unfairly tarnished" by the controversy.

During a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum last month, Jordan said he believed that several journalists who were killed by coalition forces in Iraq had been targeted.


In an April 11th, 2003 editorial for the New York Times, Mr. Jordan admitted that he had covered up for Saddam Hussein's regime in order to protect his staff and keep the CNN office in Baghdad. Although he may not have been aware of it, that admission caused a lot of animosity towards Jordan and CNN. That animosity found an outlet when the CNN News Chief implied that he had proof that US troops had killed journalists as an act of deliberate policy, and then could not back his statement up.

But the damage had been done, compounded by the fact that no transcript of his actual remarks has turned up. He was the target of an Internet and Web site campaign that was beginning to rival the one launched against CBS's Dan Rather following the network's ill-fated story last fall about President Bush's military service.

A Web site, Easongate.com, was created and distributed a petition this week calling on CNN to find a transcript and fire Jordan if he said the military had intentionally killed journalists.

The Web site had been preparing Friday to post information to help its supporters contact CNN's advertisers. A message posted on the site after Jordan's resignation said its authors were pleased with the outcome but still want a videotape of the economic forum released.

"To every reader, commentator, e-mailer and blogger that committed to this cause, thank you," a message on the Web site read. "This is a victory for every soldier who has honorably served this nation. To you we devote this victory."


Like what happened to Dan Rather before him, it was the stonewalling that ultimately did him in. The lesson for this year seems to be that nobody controls the flow of news, and trying to control it can be a career ender.

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

FEB 12, 2005 05:21 PM

"Easongate.com" "Rathergate.com"

i'm surprised no one at indymedia or democratic underground has figured out the formula and started preemptively registering the domains.

Radd

radd

Madison, WI
OLD SKOOL

FEB 12, 2005 05:24 PM

What a schmuck.

darwinsjoke

darwinsjoke

Virginia Beach, VA
July 2003

FEB 12, 2005 05:25 PM

s5 said:
"Easongate.com" "Rathergate.com"

i'm surprised no one at indymedia or democratic underground has figured out the formula and started preemptively registering the domains.


we can't forget talongate.com either.

JohnClement

JohnClement

Silver Spring, MD
January 2004

FEB 12, 2005 05:43 PM

You're a talented man, Patrick. Even when I lean towards agreeing with the source of the story, the way you describe it makes me want to disagree with you.

I should add, reading the account of it in the Washington Post, it sounded like he made an ill advised remark while trying to make a distinction from the collateral damage description of journalists given, then attempted to qualify it. No transcript or tape of what he said was released, but the "blogosphere" bullied him into resigning.

[Edited on Feb 12, 2005 8:52PM]

smithers_jones

smithers_jones

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 12, 2005 05:52 PM

I'm sure the repeated targeting of journalists in Iraq and Afghanistan was an accident.
We also tageted journalists Kosovo.

Anne Coulter, for one, thinks killing journalists is a great idea.


LAWRENCE KUDLOW (host): We got a couple of seconds before the break when you guys are all going to come back, but, Ann, I just want to give you first whack at this. Eason Jordan, top news executive at CNN -- I mean, to me, this is absolutely incredible -- this guy says at a big conference in Davos that the U.S. military is deliberately targeting and assassinating American journalists. Huh? He still has a job, huh? You got a take on that?

COULTER: Would that it were so!

KUDLOW: Would what were so?

COULTER: That the American military were targeting journalists.





[Edited on Feb 12, 2005 by smithers_jones]

llouys

llouys

Brazil
August 2003

FEB 12, 2005 06:00 PM

smithers_jones said:
I'm sure the repeated targeting of journalists in Iraq and Afghanistan was an accident.
We also tageted journalists Kosovo.

Anne Coulter, for one, thinks killing journalists is a great idea.

LAWRENCE KUDLOW (host): We got a couple of seconds before the break when you guys are all going to come back, but, Ann, I just want to give you first whack at this. Eason Jordan, top news executive at CNN -- I mean, to me, this is absolutely incredible -- this guy says at a big conference in Davos that the U.S. military is deliberately targeting and assassinating American journalists. Huh? He still has a job, huh? You got a take on that?

COULTER: Would that it were so!

KUDLOW: Would what were so?

COULTER: That the American military were targeting journalists.



Wow, just wow. She really is a psycho.

Does she even realize that she, at least nominally, is a journalist?

Holy crap, I would keep my children as far away from her as possible. If I had any.

Come to think of it, I would keep any children as far away from her as possible.

Ah, wholesale destruction of the fourth estate, it's so trendy!

Michael_J_Totten

Michael_J_Totten

Iraq
February 2004

FEB 12, 2005 06:07 PM

BillHaverchuck said: the "blogosphere" bullied him into resigning.


Well, you could chalk it up to one more point for the blogosphere. Then again, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), who also "bullied" him, aren't bloggers. But they were there when he said what he reportedly said. And they weren't happy.

Michael_J_Totten

Michael_J_Totten

Iraq
February 2004

FEB 12, 2005 06:11 PM

louys said:
Wow, just wow. She really is a psycho.


Yes, she is. And she already lost at least one media job because of it. National Review fired her right after 911 for the "we should invade their countires, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity" comment.

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

FEB 12, 2005 06:14 PM

or chalk up another point for the new political correctness.

if anything you say even remotely sounds like you're suggesting that bush or the US military might have done something nasty, your career is over.

JohnClement

JohnClement

Silver Spring, MD
January 2004

FEB 12, 2005 06:16 PM

Michael_J_Totten said:

BillHaverchuck said: the "blogosphere" bullied him into resigning.


Well, you could chalk it up to one more point for the blogosphere. Then again, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), who also "bullied" him, aren't bloggers. But they were there when he said what he reportedly said. And they weren't happy.



And David Gergen from US News & World Report and Richard Sambrook from the BBC said he clarified his remarks. They were there as well.

smithers_jones

smithers_jones

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 12, 2005 06:19 PM

s5 said:
or chalk up another point for the new political correctness.

if anything you say even remotely sounds like you're suggesting that bush or the US military might have done something nasty, your career is over.


*Ding Ding*
Especially if it might be true.

llouys

llouys

Brazil
August 2003

FEB 12, 2005 06:19 PM

Michael_J_Totten said:

BillHaverchuck said: the "blogosphere" bullied him into resigning.


Well, you could chalk it up to one more point for the blogosphere. Then again, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), who also "bullied" him, aren't bloggers. But they were there when he said what he reportedly said. And they weren't happy.



The issue of how bloggers are influencing the news is huge. I bet you could come up with a list of 30 or 40 laws that have been changed as a result of attention in the blogosphere.

One of these days, though, some group of bloggers is going to make a mistake. Look at what easongate.com has to say on Eason's resignation (bold mine):


Eason Jordan has officially resigned as executive vice president and chief news executive of CNN. The Staff of Easongate.com is pleased with Mr. Jordan taking responsibility for his actions and statements. However we still feel the World Economic Forum should release the tape of the Davos conference forthwith to settle this matter. A cloud will hang over this issue until the tape is viewed to confirm what has been reported in this affair.

The purpose of this blog from the very beginning was as follows:

· Act as a clearinghouse for information related to Mr. Jordan's recent and past statement concerning the United States military.
· Provide analysis and commentary on the developing situation.
· Advocate CNN to take real and meaningful disciplinary action against Mr. Jordan.
· Create a petition expressing the public's displeasure with Mr. Jordan's statements.
· Gather information on CNN's advertisers and make this information available to the public.

Easongate.com has achieved every single goal on this list. The CNN advertiser database and email program was prepared to go online this evening. Every person on this site worked professionally, with skill and devotion, and covered every angle of the developments.

However we are still not fully satisfied with the outcome. The tape should be released for public review, and Mr. Jordan should apologize for his remarks.

To every reader, commentor, emailer and blogger that committed to this cause, thank you. This is a victory for every soldier who has honorably served this nation. To you we devote this victory.



I didn't follow that site, but I find the first paragraph quite interesting. It doesn't sound to me like they're sure -- a "dark cloud"?

Imagine a scenario where that tape came out and his remarks were ambiguous. Or, although I suspect it's unlikely in this case, a situation where evidence came out that proved the blogosphere utterly wrong. The man's reputation is already ruined.

Personally I think that overall the blogosphere is a good thing, even a great thing. But there's defintely a discussion about blogging ethics to be had.

Michael_J_Totten

Michael_J_Totten

Iraq
February 2004

FEB 12, 2005 06:21 PM

s5 said:
or chalk up another point for the new political correctness.

if anything you say even remotely sounds like you're suggesting that bush or the US military might have done something nasty, your career is over.


Depends on whether it's true or not. No one gets canned for talking about what happend at Abu Ghraib, for example.

But anyway, he didn't lost his job for mouthing off. Like they say, it's not the "crime," it's the cover-up.

[Edited on Feb 12, 2005 6:22PM]

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

FEB 12, 2005 06:27 PM

Michael_J_Totten said:
No one gets canned for talking about what happend at Abu Ghraib, for example.



well, that's because there were photos. but republicans hate the red cross now. the red cross!

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

FEB 12, 2005 06:52 PM

Michael_J_Totten said:

s5 said:
or chalk up another point for the new political correctness.

if anything you say even remotely sounds like you're suggesting that bush or the US military might have done something nasty, your career is over.


Depends on whether it's true or not. No one gets canned for talking about what happend at Abu Ghraib, for example.

But anyway, he didn't lost his job for mouthing off. Like they say, it's not the "crime," it's the cover-up.

[Edited on Feb 12, 2005 6:22PM]



No, he lost his job because of a manufactured controversy, and people like Patrick making completely nonsensical points about "controlling the flow of news".

Eason made a remark, the contents of which are still unknown as a private individual speaking at the World Economic Forum. He's allowed to do that. This wasn't a media event, he was not reporting or speaking for CNN. He was engaged in a a contentious public debate on an emotional issue, and at least according to some present his words have been misreported and misconstrued.

What is happening is that he is being targeted by people like Pat who hate his politics and see anyone who disagrees with them as an enemy to be destroyed. Sadly, what isnot happening is an investigation into the 60+ deaths of journalists in the field in Iraq including the attack on the Hotel Palestine for which no adequate or accurate explanation has ever been given

stockula

stockula

Anchorage, AK
May 2003

FEB 12, 2005 06:54 PM

The coolest thing about this is that the bloggers got Jordan without the big newspapers and tv news spreading the story. Those outlets, even Drudge, were completely ignoring this story. If you didn't read blogs, chances are Jordan's resignation would be the first you ever heard about his slander of the military in Switzerland.

He could have done a swift apology, said that American troops AREN'T trying to kill journalists, and that would be the end of it. But like Rather, he dug in his heels and made lame non-apologies, too arrogant to let himself be criticized by pissant bloggers. Now he's going to have to find a network more in line with his paranoid anti-Americanism. I hear al-Jazeera's hiring.

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

FEB 12, 2005 06:59 PM

stockula said:
The coolest thing about this is that the bloggers got Jordan without the big newspapers and tv news spreading the story. Those outlets, even Drudge, were completely ignoring this story. If you didn't read blogs, chances are Jordan's resignation would be the first you ever heard about his slander of the military in Switzerland.

He could have done a swift apology, said that American troops AREN'T trying to kill journalists, and that would be the end of it. But like Rather, he dug in his heels and made lame non-apologies, too arrogant to let himself be criticized by pissant bloggers. Now he's going to have to find a network more in line with his paranoid anti-Americanism. I hear al-Jazeera's hiring.



I rest my case.

llouys

llouys

Brazil
August 2003

FEB 12, 2005 07:05 PM

This knife cuts both ways. Politicians and legislation on the right have also been brought down by bloggers.

heresy2007

heresy2007

New Paltz, NY
July 2004

FEB 12, 2005 07:06 PM

you know what now we should find any books he may have written and burn them.

Stock, you want to help? We can get Coulter, and your friends over at Free Republic, and we can just burn them all to the ground. These people are the scum of the earth!!!! Burn them to!!!

Michael_J_Totten

Michael_J_Totten

Iraq
February 2004

FEB 12, 2005 07:22 PM

s5 said:
but republicans hate the red cross now. the red cross!


Bill O'Reilly doesn't seem to like the Red Cross. Who else doesn't like it? First I've heard of it. It seems to me you'd have to be a pretty serious wing-nut to hate the Red Cross. I have absolutely no idea what the complaint might be.

Michael_J_Totten

Michael_J_Totten

Iraq
February 2004

FEB 12, 2005 07:25 PM

reprobate said:
What is happening is that he is being targeted by people like Pat who hate his politics and see anyone who disagrees with them as an enemy to be destroyed.


I have hardly paid any attention to this story whatsoever. But I do know that Barney Frank is pretty pissed off at Eason Jordan. And Barney Frank isn't exactly a neocon, if you know what I'm saying. I think this flap is a wee bit more than merely right-wingers out to destroy "the enemy."

catdad

catdad

Portland, OR
August 2002

FEB 12, 2005 07:25 PM

Yet if bush had not sent US troops over to Iraq under false pretenses in the first place, this situation wouldn't have come about.

"Do as the republicans say, not as they do."

Shal

Shal

Los Angeles, CA
October 2002

FEB 12, 2005 07:30 PM

Michael_J_Totten said:

s5 said:
but republicans hate the red cross now. the red cross!


Bill O'Reilly doesn't seem to like the Red Cross. Who else doesn't like it? First I've heard of it. It seems to me you'd have to be a pretty serious wing-nut to hate the Red Cross. I have absolutely no idea what the complaint might be.




Here, from one of SG's best known wingnuts:

http://suicidegirls.com/boards/Current+Events/60364/page6/#post2916315
http://suicidegirls.com/boards/Current+Events/61487/#post2959651

Apparently the Red Cross hates America and loves terrorists. surreal

[Edited on Feb 12, 2005 by Shalome]

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

FEB 12, 2005 08:13 PM

Michael_J_Totten said:
Bill O'Reilly doesn't seem to like the Red Cross.



bill o'reilly, who has a devoted television audience of millions, and is echoed all over the media.

smile

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next