Press has been lying about Iraq

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


....Journalists may be liberal, but their managers and editors are ratings-fed corporate whores who'd die rather than really offend anyone.

I could be wrong about the situation over there, but over here it's the editors that bear legal responsibility for what is published

As a consequence, editors are carefully chosen for their prudence at the very least, and yes, many of them do resemble corporate lap dogs. They're certainly not going to offend their employers.

EXCEPTION: Private Eye. Take great delight in offending the rich and infamous (and their own publishers). As they were sponsored by the late Peter Cook (Dudley Moore's co-comedian in the early days) this is not surprising.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
oh god ned, you've finally gone off the deep end

Scarborough is a flesh-faced blowhole of monumentous proportions. I can't believe you watch (well maybe I can) let alone believe anything this jackass says.

I hope your foil hat fits, Ned...

Hey Sava, I've been a right wing lunatic for some time. I am glad you finally noticed.

[Sava]

Yeah, but you can be right-wing and not be a complete whackjob

[Ramo]

The looting, he said, was targeted against the government and the Ba'ath party members.

Like goverment hospitals, schools, libraries, power and sanitation plants. What a noble cause.

[Ned]

I am sure that some of you have been watching Fox and wondered why their reporting of what was going on in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq contrasted so sharply with what we were seeing from the AP, CNN and others. While Fox was showing smiling Iraqis, celebrating and congratulating our troops, CNN and AP and the others were showing angry Shi'ite mobs shouting down with America, down with Bush and were emphasizing widespread looting and lawlessness in Baghdad.

Maybe this is an example that reporters only report bad news, but even when they reported the news, they reported it in a way to create a misimpression.

For example, Jonathan Foreman told of an interview with an Iraqi citizen of means. This Iraqi had two bodyguards protecting his home (or business?). The AP reporter, I believe it was AP, ran the story that the Iraqi had just hired the bodyguards to protect his home against looters. In truth, the Iraqi had long employed the bodyguards to protect his home. That report was not only "spin," it was a lie.

Now, if Jonathan Foreman were simply saying that the press was mis-reporting what was going on inside Iraq, it would be one thing. It would be his word against the word of many. But, he gave specific examples, named names and was sufficiently detailed in how the stores were being misreported that his versions of the facts could be checked out and rebutted if necessary.

[Jac de Molay]

The WSJ ( that liberal paragon) also reported yesterday about widespread looting at oil facilities as well, which is why they're having more difficulty than thought at cranking up oil production again.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
Yeah, but you can be right-wing and not be a complete whackjob

I thought you extreme lefties thought that that was impossible.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ned
For example, Jonathan Foreman told of an interview with an Iraqi citizen of means. This Iraqi had two bodyguards protecting his home (or business?). The AP reporter, I believe it was AP, ran the story that the Iraqi had just hired the bodyguards to protect his home against looters. In truth, the Iraqi had long employed the bodyguards to protect his home. That report was not only "spin," it was a lie.

Uh, you simply chose to believe in this Foreman person, as there seems to be nothing else backing his assertions.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ned


I thought you extreme lefties thought that that was impossible.

You might stereotype me as a lefty, but I'm not

So Ned, let me get this straight. Only FoxNews is reporting the real story?

[Ned]

Originally posted by DetroitDave
The WSJ ( that liberal paragon) also reported yesterday about widespread looting at oil facilities as well, which is why they're having more difficulty than thought at cranking up oil production again.

DetroitDave, Foreman is an embedded reporter in Baghdad. That is what he was talking about.

What the WSJ says is generally reliable if their own reporter is writing the story. (Notice how al Qa'ida targeted a WSJ reporter for execution and not an AP reporter.) If it is, however, a repeat of an AP story, well the may be some truth mixed with the fiction.

[Sava]

My suspicion is:
embedded reporter = reading scripted military news

[Ned]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Uh, you simply chose to believe in this Foreman person, as there seems to be nothing else backing his assertions.

UR, and you choose to believe the AP reporter. All this goes to show is that we tend to believe people who report the news that is consistent with our own belief system.

Which is why the Arab street truly believed the story that 4,000 Jews stayed home the morning the WTC was attacked.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
My suspicion is:
embedded reporter = reading scripted military news

The very definition of Baghdad Bob.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
You might stereotype me as a lefty, but I'm not

Could have fooled me.

So Ned, let me get this straight. Only FoxNews is reporting the real story?

Of course!

But, it is good that we have at least one network that is "right." Now we have some means of testing whether the stories we see from the liberal press are being spun for a purpose.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ned
Could have fooled me.

Sure I did. The world isn't black and white. There are more than two political ideologies and more than two sides to any issue. And frankly, anyone who doesn't agree with you, you classify as a lefty.

But, it is good that we have at least one network that is "right." Now we have some means of testing whether the stories we see from the liberal press are being spun for a purpose.

Newsflash... all TV media outlets are owned by corporate conglomerates. You are hearing their POV, not a liberal one. Just because you don't like what's being said, you shouldn't label it as liberal. That's very ignorant.