Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
US Military Looking Closer at Embed Reporters
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 592940" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>D,</p><p> </p><p>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. </p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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!</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /></p><p> </p><p>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!</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/happy-very.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":happy-very:" title="Happy Very :happy-very:" data-shortname=":happy-very:" /></p><p> </p><p>BTW: I'll pass on the pancakes and Chrissy cause I'd rather go visit Billy the Mountain and Ethell!</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 592940, member: 2189"] D, 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! :wink2: 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! :happy-very: BTW: I'll pass on the pancakes and Chrissy cause I'd rather go visit Billy the Mountain and Ethell! :wink2: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
US Military Looking Closer at Embed Reporters
Top