Discussion in 'Current Events' started by wkmac, Sep 1, 2009.
Journalists' recent work examined before embeds
I think they should screen them based on their ability to keep up with combat operations. Nothing worse than babysitting some whiny reporter.
I'm not sure, is this news worthy? I'm sure there's the good, the bad, and the ugly, mixed in this group of 60 media outlets. If you dispatch a reporter from The World Net Daily, The Daily KOS and The Cato Institutute, your going to get three different points of view It's up to us as educated citizens to aviod sound bites and bias reporting, and judge all points of views and decipher an honest opinion. It would also be a small miracle, if authorities would be open and transparent to the media/citizens and squash rumors and truther's conspiracy theories such as Pearl Harbor, JFK. UFO's,and 9/11.
To add to AV8's point, combat reporters should also pass a phyiscal and undergo a psyche evaluation .
What I saw most interesting was the fact that the services of a private firm had been contracted to vette news reporters for their past "favorable" reporting on the military. Now I'm not looking for favorable or unfavorable, I just want the news and the facts and nothing more. Plenty of punduntry at home for spinning either way but let the folks in the field be there to relay the story as and in the way that it happens. The most important thing for our guys over there is to know that reporter is going to be truthful and honest and as AV correctly pointed out, they also need to be able to carry their own weight.
I don't think DailyKos or Cato is looking to embed reporters but if their purpose is to embed to spin, then I would oppose both just as I'd oppose Antiwar.com or LRC if they attempted this just for the purpose of spinning. If a set of facts makes an obvious conclusion, then opining might be called for but I still believe the field reporter is just that, a reporter of the facts and circumstances. Rarely does a local news reporter opin on a house fire, car wreck or bank robbery and just report on the raw hard facts obtained at the scene and when they do, they usually say something stupid and end up on YouTube. Same should be true IMO of those reporting as embeds.
This again is why I'm concerned as to what the true motive is by the Pentagon and this private firm in looking for reporters who have been "favorable" in the past. How would we react if we learned that the Bush or Obama adminstration maintained favorable reporters in the White House Press Corp and controlled information by controlling questioning via a duplicitous media arm? Opps! That's is how it is isn't it!
But as you said, different people see things in different ways! One solution would be to make the reporters go "Gonzo" in the Hunter S. Thompson style but then nobody would sign up!
BTW: I'll pass on the pancakes and Chrissy cause I'd rather go visit Billy the Mountain and Ethell!
Separate names with a comma.