Originally Posted by JaJae Then why doesn't CNN show the Muslim cartoons? Out of respect for the Muslims they say. Why did they agree to "cover up" Baath killings? Because they struck a deal with other terrorists. We can go on and on forever. CNN just like every news organization ...
10-23-2006, 01:02 PM
| #101 | ||||
| One American Family at a Time.  Idealist The OC, California 
| Originally Posted by JaJae 
Well, I agree with Ted Turner. It's not a news organizations job to be patriotic, and I think their overt Americanism tainted the news they gave us for quite some time. How can we be the good guys, when so many are dead? How can we be the good guys, when we destroyed a country? People asked these same questions when we dropped the Bomb. | ||||
     |
|
10-23-2006, 01:05 PM
| #102 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur.  Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by IminWonderland It's not their job? By why is he saying it's inappropriate? When countries are at war it's typical for news stations to show flags. Is this censorship? What are the underlying reasons for him disagreeing? Why would he say such a thing? What is his "anticipated result?"
Why does he refuse to show the cartoons, but has no problem showing US soldiers being shot in the head? It's not his job to hide things from us. It's newsworthy. It's not a capitalist venture here. It's news. The American people deserve to see it all. We don't need political figures telling us what is and isn't appropriate. According to CNN muslim cartoons are offensive. Soldiers getting shot in the head is unvarnished truth. Very interesting perspective CNN has. Last edited by JaJae; 10-23-2006 at 01:39 PM. | ||||
| |
|
10-23-2006, 09:07 PM
| #103 | ||||
| One American Family at a Time. Idealist The OC, California
| Originally Posted by JaJae
No, it's not their job. It's inappropriate because at that time, in this country, every news station showed a tainted pro-war view of the war, and we didn't see the other side of this. To reflect a little, although England has supported our venture, I belive their news BBC had showed far more of the carnage, and not the watered down version we had been getting. Why would he say such a thing? Maybe it's because he sees the amount of death and destruction this war has brought, and the amount of money, and the amount of dishonesty, and brutality, and maybe he realizes that if his station would have showed both sides, the American people wouldn't have been so gung ho about "taken dem arabs oil" in the first place. If I remember right, even the government were against those cartoons being shown. If I remember, politicians were saying that they didn't want the inflammation to start up in the states, so they wanted a hands off approach to the reporting about it. I don't agree with them NOT showing the cartoons, but then again, I don't believe they are nearly as relevant as the depiction of the ACTUAL war we are in. It's not a capatalist venture? Really? Because you said:
| ||||
| |
|
10-23-2006, 09:25 PM
| #104 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Sarcasm failed. | ||||
| |
|
10-23-2006, 10:42 PM
| #105 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative  Realist
| Originally Posted by JaJae You're right. They should've shown the cartoon and maybe some other stuff. But two wrongs don't make a right. It was still right to show the video. They should show everything if it's newsworthy and it's relevant to the story they're telling.
Originally Posted by JaJae If he's referring to a gratutious, graphic US flag, then he's absolutely right. Can you name any other purpose besides 100% pure propaganda to have an American flag flying in the background of a newscast?
| ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:00 AM
| #106 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| I have to say I agree with him... Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Hunter asks Blitzer, “Does CNN want America to win this thing?” | ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:11 AM
| #107 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Bill O'Rielly sides with CNN.. sorta Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Michelle blasts CNN for sniper video on O’Reilly | ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:14 AM
| #108 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by JaJae You know what's interesting about guys like him? He keeps talking about WWII and what would've been accetable back then. He also talks now about whether CNN wants people to win, as if the media must take sides...it seems pretty clear people like him advocate using the media for propaganda purposes, or at minimum, having it censored by the office of propaganda.
Who knows...I sometimes wonder myself whether America will be better off for people getting the real scoup...whether WWII would've turned out different if we had this kind of news coverage back then...I don't know the answer, but let's cut the shit and be honest here-- he's advocating we go back to a patently propagandistic use of the media for war purposes. Maybe it's a good idea, maybe it's not. But let's be clear that that's what he wants, and not try to cover it up this "feelings of the family" bullshit, it's not necessary, etc. Oh, and on a side note, Hunter's a dumbass. He was saying the video shouldn't be aired because people abroad may get the idea to snipe American civilians abroad. WTF? It sounds like this guy is part of the "don't show anything you don't want people immitating" school of thought, or more accurately, "don't show anything that might give people ideas" school of thought. | ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:15 AM
| #109 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo No, he's advocating not airing enemy propaganda on our news. This film was made for one purpose. To hurt the American morale and to boost terrorist morale. When news organizations get handed enemy propaganda they should be careful about airing it as news and not what it really is. All I can think of is my friends over there and their families. This is a dangerous slippery slope to have soldiers getting their heads shot off on nightly news. Imagine a military kid flipping through the channels and watching a soldier getting his head shot off on the news just before bed. It's just wrong. It shows no tact.
And coming from CNN and Ted Turner's station it just makes it all the more argumentative. | ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:18 AM
| #110 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by JaJae Again, IMO that's a bullshit red herring to cover up the real issue, which is whether the media should be used for propaganda in war. If the footage were shot by a CNN camera man, and CNN aired the footage of a soldier getting sniped and killed, I believe you'd be seeing the same whining and almost the same arguments.
| ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:21 AM
| #111 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo Yes you would. But it wouldn't be as strong because the wrong-doing wouldn't be as harsh. The fact that it's a terrorist propaganda snuff film being aired as news definitely adds to the already disturbing issue of watching one of our own die from a sniper shot to the head.
| ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:29 AM
| #112 | ||||
| Baka  Idealist Adelaide, Australia
| While CNN have an obvious bias, I would argue the news services have no obligation to do anything other than provide correct information. If they had aired the footage and implied that the terrorists were "good guys" then I would consider it propaganda. The idea that the media should be there as a tool for / against troop morale isn't one I support. There are obvious political and idealogical issues involved which slant both the justification and attacking of the footage being aired. | ||||
| |
|
10-24-2006, 12:44 AM
| #113 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by JaJae Even though terrorists shot this video, it's not really a terrorist "snuff" film. A terrorist snuff film is kidnapping someone, tying him up, and then executing him on video. The reason that's a snuff film is the entire scenario is completely created by terrorists and it doesn't exist apart from the video makers' efforts.
Here, instead, it's simply a soldier getting shot by a sniper. This happens all the time in Iraq when there are no videos to capture it and is a regular, expected part of war. That a terrorist filmed this video is pretty irrelevant, IMO, because it just as easily could've been filmed by a journalist. And if it's something that happens normally, in public, and could easily be captured by a journalist, I wouldn't lump it into the snuff propaganda category. It's war footage that happens to be shot by terrorists. | ||||
| |
|
11-17-2006, 11:05 AM
| #114 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Kind of old, but..
| ||||
| |
|
11-17-2006, 11:08 AM
| #115 | ||||
| "He does own the building."  Moderate
| If they were really worried about the unvarnished truth, why aren't they showing the positive things US soldiers are doing in Iraq or the areas of Iraq that are happy US soldiers are there protecting them? | ||||
| |
|
11-17-2006, 07:31 PM
| #116 | ||||
| Better Dead than Red  Democrat Where America Goes to Talk
| cnn lost 12 viewers  | ||||
| |
|
11-17-2006, 07:43 PM
| #117 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Well at least 3.. | ||||
| |
|
11-17-2006, 07:59 PM
| #118 | ||||
| Last Starfighter  Independent Northern California
| So why isn't CNN shopwing videos of the so-called insurgents being shot by our boys? That's the only reason why many people feel there is a "massive" amount of violence towards our troops and why Iraq is erroneously percieved as a failure. If CNN showed our boys kicking the so-called insurgents' asses, then it'd be perceived as a winning situation. But all they do is show our boys getting shot up. Sure there isn't any bias there. | ||||
| |
|
11-17-2006, 08:36 PM
| #119 | ||||
| Banned  Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| Originally Posted by Diamond Cross they have in the past, I don't have the video links its from 2004, but oh yeah there were CNN reports showing Americans gunning down insurgents in Fallujah as we retook the city
| ||||
