Comments: OU

CNN is a blog?

Posted by Pericles at October 7, 2005 12:36 AM

No, CNN is not a blog. And CNN did not mention anything about the guy's connections to radical Muslims. I'm pretty sure that was the point of Sarah's post, but thanks for giving us the link to MSM's watered down generic non-news.

Posted by Oda Mae at October 7, 2005 01:00 PM

Through Googling I saw some blogs which said he had been linked to an Islamic center. Looked like unconfirmed rumor at this point; I saw no hard evidence on the two or three sites I read, anyway. Maybe it will turn out to be true; I can't say it won't. Should the media report it before it is confirmed, though? If they did, and then it turned out to be false, then bloggers would be blasting them for that.

Posted by Pericles at October 8, 2005 03:20 AM

But journalists apparently got tons of things wrong about New Orleans, which they reported without confirmation. They ran with Flushing the Koran too. It just seems a bit selective to me.

Posted by Sarah at October 8, 2005 10:30 AM

Fair enough. Although I think that the errors in the New Olreans reporting were actually errors in a conservative direction rather than a liberal one. The original reports depicted New Orleans's poor welfare recipients as vicious animals, more or less. I saw several conservative commentators jump on this point in various ways, for example to criticize welfare. You posted a link to the "Two Tribes" essay that was in this vein, and another was all over the Internet. I think that the media has a huge bias toward sensationalism, more than they have any political bias. It comes from the fct that most of the media is now in the nads of a few profit-hungry corporations, and the ethos of serving the public is breaking down.

Also, I think that it is sometimes easy to pick on small mistakes in the details of reports to ignore the substance. Okay, so the Koran wasn't flushed... intstead, it got urine sprayed on it. Would that story coming out have been any better? The fact that CBS ran with faked National Guard memos about Bush was a big win for Republicans, because it distracted people from the other evidence. I remember a great quote from the secretary of the Texas ANG unit. She said she knew the memos were fake, because she would have been the one to type them and didn't and because the commander ould never have put such things on paper. But she went on to add that the memos did capture exactly the sentiments that the commander freely expressed verbally about Bush around the office. :)

Posted by Pericles at October 8, 2005 02:27 PM

Bombs at Georgia Tech and UCLA too.

Once is a fluke.
Twice a coincidence.
Three times is enemy action.

Posted by Purple Avenger at October 11, 2005 06:26 AM