Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (100023)	2/12/2005 11:43:39 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793759

Continuing "the story about the story." Big Three Network Coverage Of Eason Jordan's Resignation (Cue Crickets) By Captain Ed on CNN More than fourteen hours after the resignation of CNN's chief news executive Eason Jordan for his unsubstantiated allegations of deliberate murder and torture against journalists by the US military, I decided to check if the Big Three broadcast networks had finally decided to cover the story. The result disappoints but does not surprise me at all. At MS-NBC, the only reporting of Jordan's resignation is provided by the same Associated Press report first published thirteen hours ago. MS-NBC does give the link a prominent spot on its home page, however, while at ABC a reader has to do a search to find another, later AP report by David Bauder. Both reports omit any mention of Jordan's earlier comments in Portugal in 2004, or the comments made about Israel in 2002, or even Jordan's own admission that he had sold out to Saddam, an admission made in 2003 only after Saddam had been removed by the US military he slandered. The ABC/AP report does contain one nugget of interesting trivia that appears new: After several management restructurings at CNN, Jordan actually had no current operational responsibility over network programming. But he was CNN's chief fix-it man overseas, arranging coverage in dangerous or hard-to-reach parts of the world. Does that sound like a chief news executive's duties? It sounds more like an attempt at CNN to defend its credibility by applying a Les Moonves-like spin to Jordan's contributions. Oh, he didn't really run the news organization, no no no; he just worked on special projects, so you see, he couldn't possibly have biased our news coverage. I wonder if they can pull that off with Jordan, let alone Chris Cramer. Maybe no one is in charge of news organizations at all; people like Andrew Heyward, Dan Rather, Jordan, and Cramer just sit around their offices and the news holistically appears on your television screens. At least those two networks acknowledged that Jordan resigned. CBS, strangely, has maintained its blackout of the story. The only hit on CBS News' website for Eason Jordan goes to feedback on an earlier, unrelated column about media bias. At CBS, they tell you what you need to know, rather than just report the news. Remember when we called for Heyward's resignation after Memogate and the Thornburgh-Boccardi report? This is the reason why, and CBS still hasn't got a clue.

To: LindyBill who wrote (100023)	2/13/2005 8:52:47 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793759

This is always the left's attack frame. Make everything "rich vs poor." Krugman can sell it to the true believers on the left. Fortunately, the public is buying it. You can't dismiss Paul Krugman that easily. He is a professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University. He received his B.A. from Yale University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from MIT in 1977. He has taught at Yale, MIT and Stanford. IMO you have to at least care to find out if what he is saying is true or not: More than half of the benefits from this backdoor tax cut would go to people with incomes of more than a million dollars; 97 percent would go to people with incomes exceeding $200,000. It so happens that the number of taxpayers with more than $1 million in annual income is about the same as the number of people who would have their food stamps cut off under the Bush proposal. But it costs a lot more to give a millionaire a break than to put food on a low-income family's table: eliminating limits on deductions and exemptions would give taxpayers with incomes over $1 million an average tax cut of more than $19,000.