Peter Arnett: "Iraqis ... See Me as a Fellow Warrior." - Page 6

spiritof1202 · April 3, 2003, 16:40

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
OHMIGOD!!! SPIRITOF 1202!!! SHAME!!!

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GROUP FREEDOM!!!
THIS IS A LIE USED TO PERSECUTE INDIVIDUALS!!!
IT WAS INVENTED BY "DISADVANTAGED MINORITIES"!!!

THE ONLY FREEDOMS ARE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS!!!

YIKES!!!

Right... the freedoms of a million individuals are collectively more important than the freedom of one.

Ned · April 3, 2003, 16:42

MarkG: Do you have the same feelings about Geraldo Rivera? He was booted out of Iraqi by the military because he gave away future ops plans. Now, he may also be out of a job because being a war correspondent was his job.

gunkulator · April 3, 2003, 16:46

Someone please tell me what freedom Arnett has lost? Noone will stop him from working for any network that wants to hire him. Not NBC, not the gov't, not the vast right wing conspiracy - nobody. In fact, he IS right now working for another network and there isn't a single US gov't agency out to stop him.

Ned · April 3, 2003, 16:48

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Viking

Virtually all writers on constitutional freedoms express their belief that the media should be free from coercion by those in positions of power.

The Bill of Rights protects speakers against government action, not some amorphous people in "power." In order for Arnett's rights to have been violated, he would have to show that someone in government put some pressure on MSNBC to fire him.

Actually, if someone in government did give MSNBC such a call, MSNBC would be up in arm big time about the attempted government coercion. You can bet on it.

Ned · April 3, 2003, 16:53

gunkulator, I think there are a lot of people who do not understand how America works. In most other countries, the TV press is not free, but is run by the government itself. So, when a reporter gets fired by, let us say, Greek TV, he is fired by the government.

Sava · April 3, 2003, 16:55

I just think its funny how people bash this guy, but yet, he has first-hand experience. He's been right in the middle of this sh1tstorm. Not sitting on his ass in front of a computer screen; or in front of a TV watching what the media conglomerates want you to watch.

spiritof1202 · April 3, 2003, 16:56

well... we are free to bash him... most do... and thats the point.

Sava · April 3, 2003, 16:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
gunkulator, I think there are a lot of people who do not understand how America works. In most other countries, the TV press is not free, but is run by the government itself. So, when a reporter gets fired by, let us say, Greek TV, he is fired by the government.

a democratic, public controlled news source, or "Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch" news?

Sava · April 3, 2003, 16:59

Quote:

Originally posted by spiritof1202
well... we are free to bash him... most do... and thats the point.

I'm free to where my underwear on the outside and walk around with mayonaise in my hair... but I don't.

spiritof1202 · April 3, 2003, 17:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
I'm free to where my underwear on the outside and walk around with mayonaise in my hair... but I don't.

good for you. I choose to bash Peter Arnett... doen't mean I'm wrong for doing so. I disagree with his assessment. The war plan was not clearly "wrong, in a quagmire and being rewritten", as recent history has shown, and Peter was an idiot for appearing on Iraqi TV, which is clearly a 100% anti-american/british propoganda tool.

I say shame on him, good for NBC, and I won't watch a news channel which employs him.

Sava · April 3, 2003, 17:09

Well, I think that its wrong to assume you know more about the situation than him. I don't agree with him either, but I'm not going to make myself look like an ***** by bashing him or boycotting whatever news agency he works for.

The Mad Viking · April 3, 2003, 17:14

Ned:

Quote:

In order for Arnett's rights to have been violated, he would have to show that someone in government put some pressure on MSNBC to fire him.

No, in order for Arnett's rights to have been violated, either (A) someone acting on behalf of government interests put pressure on MSNBC to fire him, or
(B) MSNBC fired him without just cause. A reporter making an inflammatory statement might be just cause, or not. Of course, it may be impossible to PROVE his rights were violated, but that is NOT the same thing.

Quote:

Actually, if someone in government did give MSNBC such a call, MSNBC would be up in arm big time about the attempted government coercion. You can bet on it.

Please.

NBC is owned by General Electric. GE makes about $2 BILLION a year from the Pentagon.

The Pentagon clearly could not have been pleased with Arnett's comments. How can a media outlet who is also an arms dealer be objectively critical of their customer?

Sava · April 3, 2003, 17:19

As for Arnett getting fired... NBC is his boss, and if his boss didn't like his conduct (i.e. doing that silly interview) than NBC has every right to fire him.

Az · April 3, 2003, 17:21

how are you doing, TMV?

spiritof1202 · April 3, 2003, 17:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
Well, I think that its wrong to assume you know more about the situation than him. I don't agree with him either, but I'm not going to make myself look like an ***** by bashing him or boycotting whatever news agency he works for.

Well, I disagreed with him when he said it... and he was found to be wrong. Why is it wrong to assume that I know more than he did? Factually, he was incorrect. And why is it wrong to boycott a news agency?

Hueij · April 3, 2003, 17:44

Quote:

He is also in a competitive environment in which RATINGS matter.

What he said is unpopular to the audience in the US. It is a reporters job not only to report news, but to maintain and increase the networks ratings in doing so.

So that's how you guys get your news? Report what's going on but be sure to suck up to the public?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...

This explains a lot...

yavoon · April 3, 2003, 18:02

there are only two ways to do news, let the gov't control it, and hope they produce a good product.

or let the free market control it and hope the consumers demand a good product.

being that those are the two known sources of income for a news agency.

MarkG · April 4, 2003, 03:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
MarkG: Do you have the same feelings about Geraldo Rivera? He was booted out of Iraqi by the military because he gave away future ops plans. Now, he may also be out of a job because being a war correspondent was his job.

actually, Rivera might go back to Iraq. Fox execs didnt get terrified by what the "silent majority" (i'm not saying the "pentagon minority"

) might do(although the fact that it is sildent guarantees that it wont bother to do much

) and backed him up. Now i read that the US Army is willing to give him another chance in hope that "he learned his lesson"(actual quote of unnamed US official i think)

now tell me what is worse:
1) speaking your mind and just saying your opinion with zero effect (for 1 minute of Arnett saying the initial war plans didnt work, you've got hours every day of US official saying "everything is fine. we're kicking ass")
2) showing coalition troops movements and tactics in real-time (although i dont think the Iraqi troops opposing those US forces were watching Fox at the time)

MarkG · April 4, 2003, 03:02

Quote:

Originally posted by gunkulator
Someone please tell me what freedom Arnett has lost?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...53#post1882253

MarkG · April 4, 2003, 03:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
gunkulator, I think there are a lot of people who do not understand how America works. In most other countries, the TV press is not free, but is run by the government itself. So, when a reporter gets fired by, let us say, Greek TV, he is fired by the government.

dont you worry, we've got our share of corporate-controlled media
we understand how the system works...

btw, state-run National Greek TV has also hired Peter Arnett

Gatekeeper · April 4, 2003, 03:08

I think the Robins Report in this week's TV Guide is funny. "Gulf Warrior: At 68, Arnett is the comeback kid in Iraq," is the title of the article. Heh. I bet the writer is wishing right now that Arnett hadn't done that interview with Iraqi television. It sucks sometimes to write articles two weeks before publication date.

Gatekeeper

LoneWolf · April 4, 2003, 03:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Tingkai
NBC are a bunch of cowards with no journalistic integrity.

Arnett's comments have been said dozens of times by reporters around the world. The Iraqi resistance is stronger than expected. Re-inforcements are being sent in. The initial war plan of charging straight for Baghdad failed and had to be changed because the US/UK forces need to protect their supply lines. His reports, and other reports, of civilian casaulties affect public opinion around the world. That is a fact.

The sad thing is seeing Arnett apologize when he has done nothing wrong. Yes, he did an interview with the Iraqi state-controlled television station, but would anyone complain about him being interviewed by the state-owned BBC or CBC?

Hey, if your intent is to equate the CBC with the Iraqi press, you won't get any argument from me!

gunkulator · April 4, 2003, 10:03

Tingkai : "The Iraqi resistance is stronger than expected."

I have yet to hear this from any coalition authority. I think it would be more correct to say that the Iraqi resistance is stronger than the media expected.

"The initial war plan of charging straight for Baghdad failed "

Link please to this plan. The only admitted problem with the war plan so far is the slowness in opening up the northern front. This was due to the unexpected diplomatic failures with Turkey.

I can't help but feel that both your statements are yet another example of the media trying to make a story out of nothing. If a rumor is repeated enough times, it somehow becomes reportable, even if it is the media themselves that start the rumor.

Those of you who remember the 1988 presidential election may recall that the media repeatedly reported that Bush the Elder was shackled by something called "the wimp factor". Yet when pressed for a source, noone could come up for one. Eventually most people figured out that "the wimp factor" was mostly a media fabrication.

gunkulator · April 4, 2003, 10:06

double post

DinoDoc · April 4, 2003, 10:54

Quote:

Originally posted by MarkG
actually, it's firstly a suppression of the freedom of everyone else beyond arnett. arnett is now an example: dont talk or you'll be fired

He has more work than ever: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml...toryID=2508609

gsmoove23 · April 4, 2003, 11:03

One things for sure, no matter how we see the Arnett situation, most of the people beyond our borders will see it as the big bad americans stifling someone who has something unpleasant to say.

DinoDoc · April 4, 2003, 11:05

So?

ahenobarb · April 4, 2003, 11:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava

a democratic, public controlled news source, or "Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch" news?

So the people control the media in Greece? There's a democratic vote everyday about what articles go into the news? All papers are run by somebody.

Ned · April 4, 2003, 12:30

Well, Mark, Geraldo caused more harm to the extent he may have compromised US plans. However, from a ratings point of view, MSNBC and CNN are in a real battle with flag-waving FOX. I think they drew the conclusion that they had to fire Arnett or else people would simply turn them off - not everyone of course, but enough to cost the network a lot of money.

MarkG · April 4, 2003, 12:43

Quote:

He has more work than ever

outside the US (home of the free)