Censorship by death - Page 2

gsmoove23 · April 11, 2003, 16:21

Ned, unless you speak arabic and normally watch al-jazeera I've gotta ask how you come by your assumptions and if you have any access to english al-jazeera stories online please share. The accusations you make are based on vague second hand accounts.

This is the Op-ed piece. Doesn't mention any softening on the reporting in Iraq, just keeping quiet on specific stories that might have endangered people. I don't see him getting fired.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html

Ned · April 11, 2003, 16:31

Quote:

Originally posted by BeBro

Very easy to say that when one sits safe at home, isn´t it?

Yes it is. I only wish I were in the US military now or on the front lines like hundreds of reporters. However, I was drafted for the Vietnam War, though never served due to bad eyes.

Patriotism is afire here in the states. Many young men are joining the military with pride. We are not reluctant to fight for democracy. You Germans should know this better than most.

Sava · April 11, 2003, 16:34

Ask the Dixie Chicks about censorship.

Ned · April 11, 2003, 16:34

Quote:

Originally posted by gsmoove23
Ned, unless you speak arabic and normally watch al-jazeera I've gotta ask how you come by your assumptions and if you have any access to english al-jazeera stories online please share. The accusations you make are based on vague second hand accounts.

This is the Op-ed piece. Doesn't mention any softening on the reporting in Iraq, just keeping quiet on specific stories that might have endangered people. I don't see him getting fired.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html

Actually, CNN, FOX and MSNBC periodicly run stories on what al Jazeera is reporting. I also check out their English site

http://english.aljazeera.net

As soon as I find a link to that interview, I will post it.

BeBro · April 11, 2003, 16:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Patriotism is afire here in the states. Many young men are joining the military with pride. We are not reluctant to fight for democracy. You Germans should know this better than most.

What has this to do with the topic?

I can see nothing wrong in caring for the safety of journalists. I would even say this belongs to the job. When they get killed while standing up for the truth - who then is left to tell the truth?

Sava · April 11, 2003, 16:41

Actually BeBro, Ned is right. The Germans should know about Nationalistic pride that leads to an increase in military service.

mark13 · April 11, 2003, 16:42

You guys didn't know about this?

Just about every BBC news report I saw from Iraq before Saddam's fall was introduced with the phrase "This report has been monitored by the Iraqi authorities".

BeBro · April 11, 2003, 16:42

We know - and?

Ned · April 11, 2003, 16:42

Ask the Dixie Chicks about biting the hand that feed them.

gsmoove23 · April 11, 2003, 16:43

Wow, that links finally working. I've been trying it for days.

What I see is even now they're reporting relatively harsh US stories. This is more to do with the feelings of the arab street then any payment schemes from Saddam.

Sava · April 11, 2003, 16:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Ask the Dixie Chicks about biting the hand that feed them.

So we should boycott and blacklist anyone who thinks that the President is stupid? YIKES! That would be harder than trying to find all the illegal immigrants in this country.

Ned · April 11, 2003, 16:49

Quote:

Originally posted by mark13
You guys didn't know about this?

Just about every BBC news report I saw from Iraq before Saddam's fall was introduced with the phrase "This report has been monitored by the Iraqi authorities".

The point is that CNN, at least, was not reporting on the intimidation it was receiving, or on the worst aspects of the the Saddam regime, for the last 12 years. The woman who talked to CNN in 1990 was torn limb from limb. CNN knew about it and failed to say anything.

But the larger question is, did any news media anywhere acurately report on Saddam for the last 12 years?

Ned · April 11, 2003, 16:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
So we should boycott and blacklist anyone who thinks that the President is stupid? YIKES! That would be harder than trying to find all the illegal immigrants in this country.

I'm sorry, Sava, the people who disagree with the Dixie Chicks simply are not buying their products. Everyone who speaks out publicly on a controverisal issue will alienate some. But country music fans tend to be patriotic. What the Dixie Chicks did was to offend their base.

Lord Merciless · April 11, 2003, 16:58

Not buying Dixie Chick products is my freedom, my choice.

They have to right to say anything they want, customers have the right to buy anything or nothing.

mark13 · April 11, 2003, 16:58

Quote:

But the larger question is, did any news media anywhere acurately report on Saddam for the last 12 years?

I think that prior to 9/11 and the War on Terror, news agencies were largely apathetic to the Iraqis' plight. There was no need to carry any of the more gruesome stories at risk to the journalists themselves - any more than western journalists aren't risking life and limb in the DR Congo now, for instance.

Ramo · April 11, 2003, 17:04

Yes, the Ba'athists were involved in censorship. This is news?

What did you folks think before?

gsmoove23 · April 11, 2003, 17:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
Not buying Dixie Chick products is my freedom, my choice.

They have to right to say anything they want, customers have the right to buy anything or nothing.

Sure, but is it right for ClearChannel, a company which owns an insane amount of radio stations in this country to pull them off of all their radio channels? It seems that someone is being negligent in protecting freedom of speech in this country. Maybe the FCC? I don't argue that a broadcaster should be allowed to pull music they find offensive but that a single entity should be able to own such a large portion of a media and do the same smacks of censoship.

PLATO · April 11, 2003, 19:13

Why CNN didn't report certain things is understandable...Why they knew what they knew and then led the charge of anti-war sentiment is reprehensible.

Ned · April 11, 2003, 19:27

Brendt Sadler reports that he was a target. However, until today, he did not mention the plot to kill him.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...ler/index.html

chequita guevara · April 11, 2003, 19:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
For those of you who do not live in the United States, you should understand that CNN's confession is the major story of the day.

Major news of the day on what network? I didn't see a thing about it on ABCNews.

chequita guevara · April 11, 2003, 19:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Patriotism is afire here in the states. Many young men are joining the military with pride. We are not reluctant to fight for democracy.

Who's fighting for democracy? Not us, especially when it's denied us here at home.

BeBro · April 11, 2003, 20:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Brendt Sadler reports that he was a target. However, until today, he did not mention the plot to kill him.

...which of course may have nothing to do with the fact that it is now much safer to admit this since it becomes clearer day by day that the regime has lost. Ahh, I forgot that these journalists shouldn´t worry about their own lives, stupid me.

gsmoove23 · April 11, 2003, 23:13

Quote:

Originally posted by PLATO1003
Why CNN didn't report certain things is understandable...Why they knew what they knew and then led the charge of anti-war sentiment is reprehensible.

worthless

Ned · April 12, 2003, 01:13

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Who's fighting for democracy? Not us, especially when it's denied us here at home.

Che, you never give up, do you?

Ned · April 18, 2003, 12:10

Has anyone noticed this tagline on CNN's stories:

EDITOR'S NOTE: CNN's policy is to not report information that puts operational security at risk.

The controversy concerning CNN continues to swirl. MSNBC and FOX continue to hit CNN hard.

Recent reports showed that CNN reported directly what the Iraqi information people told them to report. The Iraqi minister would scribble onto a piece of paper, hand it to a producer, who would hand it to the reporter, who would read it.

CNN also went out of their way to praise Saddam and attack the US in order to get interviews.

But, from the above tag line, it appears they are continuing to give us biased reporting! But at least now we know.

I wonder how many other "Western" media were doing this kind of thing, and how many are continuing to do it.

I suggest one can tell by which news media are carrying the story -- and which are not.

MichaeltheGreat · April 18, 2003, 12:16

It's all spin. Nobody is out there to tell the "truth" because that takes too much time to gather and figure out what the truth really is, and meanwhile, everyone else has beat you to the punch. It's about selling to your audience and meeting the bottom line.

The "truth" will emerge in a few months or years.

gsmoove23 · April 18, 2003, 12:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Has anyone noticed this tagline on CNN's stories:
EDITOR'S NOTE: CNN's policy is to not report information that puts operational security at risk.

Are you kidding, how is this biased? The controversy you speak of is only whipped up by Fox and publications like National Review and such, bastions of biased reporting. Its hilarious to hear. The cadres of US officials, former generals and embedded reporters were broken up on CNN by reports from inside Iraq sometimes that always quite clearly stated they were under close supervision of the Iraqi regime and were restricted on what they could report. Big whup!

gunkulator · April 18, 2003, 12:35

Dixie Chicks learned the hard way that ultimately we are all salemen or saleswomen. Tick off those who provide your meal ticket and don't be surprised if they choose not to buy your wares. AFAIK, not one agent of the gov't has prevented the Dixie Chicks from saying their piece.

Boycotts and demonstrations are time honored ways of pressuring public organizations and people to change. Both the left and right have effectively used them for years. They are part of our freedoms.

Japher · April 18, 2003, 12:35

Quote:

The "truth" will emerge in a few months or years.

Ya, once we decide on what exactly it is...

Strong arming of the media is wrong, but it will always happen. CNN has lost its credubility, if it is found that others succumbed to the evil eye I am sure they will be ostrasized...

ThePantaloonDog · April 18, 2003, 12:41

Please! If you didn't realize that reporters in Iraq were being monitored and intimadated I have bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you. And honestly I have to say CNN did make the right choice. Why risk the lives of reporters on information that we know is going to be biased? Why risk innocent father's and mother's lives when the regime that threatens them is going to be in the dumpster in a couple of weeks? Freedom of the press is great but why would CNN needlessly throw people's lives away just for freedom of the press?