Aaron Brown: Truth doesn't matter on cable news

[quaoar]

Former CNN anchor Aaron Brown gave a speech in Florida and had some interesting things to say:

http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/content/news/brown0126.html

"Truth no longer matters in the context of politics and, sadly, in the context of cable news," said Aaron Brown, whose four-year period as anchor of CNN's NewsNight ended in November, when network executives gave his job to Anderson Cooper in a bid to push the show's ratings closer to front-runner Fox News.

Brown said he tried to give viewers a balanced diet of light and serious news with NewsNight. "But I always knew when I got to the Brussels sprouts, I was on thin ice," he said.

< snip >

Important issues, such as the prosecution of the war in Iraq at home and abroad, are being clouded over by "mud-wrestling" that skirts substance, he said. Consider what he called "the swift-boating of John Murtha," the Democratic congressman whose war record was smeared when he called for an exit strategy in Iraq. "Cable didn't search for the truth, but engaged in mock debates pitting those making the charges against Murtha's defenders," he said.

Many Americans on the left and the right aren't interested in the truth, but simply want news that confirms their viewpoints, he said. "You'd think that it's no more complex than good vs. evil," he said.

[napi21]

1. Gee, I was wondering what happened to Aaron.

It seems the same thing happened to him as happened to Phil Donahue.

Such a sad statement!

[grasswire]

I was missing Aaron Brown the other evening

I realized that there's no calm, rational news reader on in that time period. Cooper is a bit too tabloid for my taste these days.

[eve_was_framed]

3. I totally agree

[mzmolly]

9. I thought Cooper was great during katrina, but he's milking it. Aaron

generally had an enjoyable informative balanced program. I too miss him.

[dalloway]

20. Aaron Brown was the only reason I kept cable for years

He was the best anchor out there, IMO. I am awaiting his next act--I hope it is speaking truth to power.

[SteppingRazor]

2. WHA??!!!!! I'm stunned! Stunned, I tell you!

Cable news cares about ratings more than truth?! Sweet Jesus! When did that happen?!

(And, c'mon, do I even need to put the :sarcasm: label on this?)

[blm]

43. And thus the reason why we need to take the battle TO BROADCAST MEDIA.

If we don't expose them, all our issues will be defined by the RW machine, no matter WHAT the issue or WHO of the Dems is speaking out.

[stillcool]

4. You would think someone in his position...

would be a little bolder. Television media personalities always blame the viewers for the content. Fail-safe talking points do nothing to kick the can further down the street...especially coming from one that has displayed the intellect to know better.

[stray cat]

30. he got canned - how much clout do you think he had?

[stillcool]

34. well...that's the point...

what has he got to lose? I mean, if you're too sober for CNN...where ya gonna go?

[tinfoilinfor2005]

72. I agree. Forinstance, he didn't mention the fact that networks,

like newspapers, are often owned by billionaires and corporations with their own agendas (prime seats inside of Cheney's policy meetings), and they manipulate the format. The viewers don't REALLY have any choices...shall we watch Tweety or Wolf or Hannity tonight? Pretty sad that in order to find balance, we have to go to Comedy Central.

[PATRICK]

5. The truth is

the left can handle the truth and the right must block it. If that isn't at least an element of good vs. evil then Brown still is brown-nosing for the anti-news side. That is the current situation and it is that stark for anyone not complicated by being caught in the middle sucking up to the side with power and trying to legitimize lies for the sake of balance. Who made that one on one format anyway? They still get around to blaming the ones making waves against power, never themselves.

Evil blames others, good makes allowances and often takes more blame than it deserves.

[Che_Nuevara]

13. Let's not start a mudslinging campaign or anything.

There are just as many people "on the left" who have absolutely no love for truth and whose only goals are the spread of their own ideas as there are "on the right". Moreso, there are just as many conservatives in America who find propagandism and information manipulation as despicable as many liberals do. Information manipulation is not, I repeat, not in any way limited to the right.

In the current situation, it is indeed clear to the informed, discerning citizen that the media is being hijacked by the right wing. However, it is not a "stark" contrast for your average American who, in addition to generally not knowing where to find credible news sources and which news sources to steer away from, does not understand the political arena and therefore is not sensitive to such issues. Most Americans do not even have a firm enough grasp on politics to truly discern who is "in power" and who is "out of power", other than that our President has an R next to his name on CNN.

Moreover, I think we ought to avoid a "good vs. evil" debate here, as that cannot, in any way, go anywhere good. Your claim about good, evil, and blame may well work for you because it is built into your definition of good and evil. But be careful about what you assume about other people's definitions thereof.

[PATRICK]

27. Definitions do not change truth

Brown is evading his role in the mess even as he bemoans it. Of course the left has been handed a great preponderance of facts the right must avoid at all costs. It doesn't mean the left by default is sanctified and infallible, only unable to capitalize on the power of truth because of the very flaws you mention. Also most speakers as well as formats tilted to power are further chosen or pushed into a doomed dialectic where the truth must be obscured or abused in order to participate.

It is that stark by default but in no way is there a yin and yang appearance to the debate. It is the news presentation failure, even deliberate taking sides at times with lies, that makes the fight both polarized and muddied. the left loses by mere participation in the enterprise and is faulted again for being imperfect with a perfectly abandoned field of facts and ideals. of course the viewers are not meant to see things that way or the left's way, even if they like neither way which is frustrating but still safe for the RW so long as their rivals are ineffective and the indictments distant.

No need to avoid a good vs. evil debate here so long as we accept that all humans are imperfect conflicted "complex" creatures. In fact it is reasonable to warn ourselves should the left "win" then the accidental championing of truth will be set loose normally. then all the old complaints about left ideologues will have context again- except people will have the stronger grudge against the tyrants they suffered under for so long. The temptation to elitism, or to artificially maintain the accidental monopoly- which is not exactly that since a lot of conservatives also imperfectly remain loyal to truth and ideals, will come with change of power. And no, taking pride in this sad state of affairs or boasting to people blinded carries great dangers and responsibilities the traditional left, and their spokesmen from proud niches of past powerless irrlevance has not lived up to very well, or at least well enough. The lie is purer and in power so the left eats the ditched truth and its own much more easily. Water flows downhill.

OK that is windy, but simply put, most people feel when things are wrong or feel wrong when manipulated. People responsible for those things or arranging clarifying forums on those things currently are sinking deeper and deeper into a lie- always a complex murk to maintain footing in. They control the foglights and complain about people waving flashlights somewhat more than those with the fog machines. Getting lost in the specific issues is also a DLC talent for adjusting to the state of being lost at sea. There is a natural way out. Surprise, it can't be done. Sometimes blame is irrelevant and assigns guilt all the way down the same slippery slope.

Again we are talking down the ordinary viewers as we criticize the left. Talking about good vs. evil, how does it come to that when trying to land a punch against a blatant criminal enterprise?

[CottonBear]

28. Bush and his minions are evil and the Democrats are good.

This is no time to be nice. It is the time to speak the truth. And the truth is that Bush doesn't care about black people or any other people except his super-rich cronies.

[ginnyinWI]

36. If we abandon respect for reason and facts

we will be as bad as the RW. Every Democrat is not "good" and every Republican is not "bad", even in these highly polarized days.

[Che_Nuevara]

44. Do me a favor:

please concisely define the terms "good" and "evil".


Thanks :)

[Frustratedlady]

6. Well, I For One...

miss Aaron. I know some didn't agree with him all the time, but you could almost read between the lines of what he was saying and get the message he was supposedly conveying was not one he totally agreed with just by watching his eyes and pauses/smiles. I have rarely watched CNN since he left.

Aaron had a calming influence, rather than the screaming/yelling of so many other newscasters/programs (look at what they've added). We need to keep some of those "gentlemen and gentlewomen" around, if for no other reason than that they remind us that you can converse in a civil manner and get your point across, even if it doesn't always change the mind of the listener. It gives them some fat to chew on and ponder.

I worry that our country is becoming a community of screamers and cussers. Hate and hot tempers don't buy you much more than a bellyache.

[mzmolly]

8. I've always liked him too. I found him to be thoughtful and fair.

I don't expect the news to forward my views all the time. That's what sets us apart from FAUX news viewers, right?

[calimary]

14. Yeah, tell me about it. When you have the o'reillys and limbaughs

of the world, and now, CNN's glenn beck, that IS all it is.

I, too, miss Aaron for his calming influence and his very droll, very dry wit. And, frankly, as I get older, I've begun to appreciate the would-be "elders" on TV who aren't necessarily pretty-boys but have something to say, and some time-leavened perspective with which to say it. Anderson Cooper is okay, but just another pretty face, and they're a dime a dozen.

[Sequoia]

52. Yes, like the immortal Cronkite.

[CrispyQ]

15. I enjoyed his civility too.

I agree about our country becoming screamers & cussers. Everyone wants to be heard but no one wants to listen. It perpetuates the "You're with us or against us" mentality of this administration.

[incapsulated]

47. His was the only show I could watch on CNN, or most cable news

I watched Cooper during Katrina but now it's back to the fluff for Anderson.

I do miss Aaron.

[mzmolly]

7. I'm glad he's speaking. I am sickened by the fact that FOX is the leader

in ratings? This could explain why CNN just hired Republican inserts?

Looks like cable news is going to be completely taken over with RW "opinion" posing as news.

[ClayZ]

10. K and R

:kick:

[cindyw]

11. I used to love Aaron Brown. He was very reassuring and calming.

Voice of reason. Kind of like the kindly grampa version of Keith Olbermann. Where Keith is funny, he was steady. Both are reasonable in a world of WTF reality. I miss that.

[NNN0LHI]

61. Kind of like in a Dr. Phil sort of a way n/t

[wisteria]

12. I miss Aaron Brown. A real newsperson. n/t

[savemefromdumbya]

16. Ofcourse one could buy out all the Tv networks and papers

in a revolution that's what you need first take over the media! Play Rupert Murdoch at his own game. Do we have any multi billionaires here who want a few cable networks. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to fire O'Reilly, Tweety, etc when you take over!

[radio4progressives]

17. Oh man i can't believe this.

Aaron Brown was completely derelict as an anchor in allowing phony propaganda to pass as truth, time and time and time again.

[lostnfound]

37. I know what you're saying but

I think he just had a couple of specific blind spots or a certain gullibility in not imagining just how deep the lies coming out of the government could be -- or the extent of the govt propaganda function.

When I compare the perspective he conveys with Amy Goodman, for example, I tend to think that he just has certain blind spots. The constraints of corporate TV masters are invisible furniture for him. He's never read Chomsky, I bet. And the class perspective is missing.

[radio4progressives]

54. Exactly, of course that's what's missing with all of them..

and you know, i don't expect tv news anchors to be "Chomsky readers" per se, but i do expect that they at least read materials from that perspective into the mix of the right wing think tank publications to at least provide a fuller breath on the "issues of concern". I'm glad he's speaking out now, but unless he can see his own short comings when playing one himself, he needs to expose those revelations, that is if they exist.

[MellowOne]

18. Love this part

Brown said he tried to give viewers a balanced diet of light and serious news with NewsNight. "But I always knew when I got to the Brussels sprouts, I was on thin ice," he said.

[yodermon]

19. Aaron & Keith O.

ought to get together and start their own network.

[ewagner]

21. You could see the transition taking place

When Aaron first came on he was terrific! Calm. Rational. completely trustworthy...but things started changing after the attack on the World Trade Centers...other networks started grabbing ratings away from CNN and the pressure on Aaron to "get with the program" started to show.

I miss him too but I started to miss him long before he went off the air.

[samhsarah]

22. I think he's right.

Journalists have fallen short in presenting important news in ways that allow viewers to see how it matters in their lives. But viewers must take up the battle as well, he said. "It's not enough to say you want serious news. You have to watch it. It isn't enough to say you want serious debate. You have to engage in it."

[VP505]

23. I agree

and here is a link that everyone should have a look at.http://www.stopsinclair.org/

[jonnyblitz]

24. I lost all respect for Aaron Brown when he told Amy Goodman

on Democracy Now that, during the lead-up to, and at the beginning of the war, that the media (CNN specifically) did NOT have a pro-war bias. she told him she felt otherwise (that anti-war voices were NOT being represented) and he got nasty with her. I know he is popular here at DU but I think he is just a tool like the rest of them.

[Kurovski]

26. It would appear that Mr. Brown has come to his senses.

How interesting is it that the media members can afford a modicum objectivity and honesty only after they are no longer a large cog in the Corporate media machinery?

[PATRICK]

29. A modicum is right

Just because they didn't go all the way to the mat for the media atrocity doesn't mean they are converts or even sorry for their role.

The idea about not judging others is a good one if we include not cutting false slack and praising hints of humanity while performing badly against the general welfare and their own supposed profession.

And former Nixon AG Mitchell had the same sentiment. "If you think we are bad just wait."

And they are getting worse. They have to.

[Trevelyan]

83. Eason Jordon, 20 years with CNN stated that * was murdering journalists

at a corporate bigwig function THEN quit the next day and then apologized. Something more is going on to make people who speak out turn into a version of the Soviet show trials.

[AX10]

86. I remember that.

[wildwww2]

50. You are absolutely correct. And when he interviewed Scott Ritter.

He was more concerned with Scott`s sex life than his information that could of kept us from this murderous war crime that Bu$h and his propagandist tools had to have. Aaron Brown is no more a journalist than I am a professional wrestler.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[Carni]

63. I got in a really pissy exchange with him in email one time

I wrote and politely accused him of bias and to my amazement I got an insulting reply.

I have forgotten what issue it revolved around was, but I was well within range to accuse him of GOP bias and thought his response was really arrogant.

[NewJeffCT]

66. Brown is right of center most of the time

I remember he had Michael Moore on, and Moore basically started off saying how the two of them were opposites politically, to which Brown agreed.

However, Brown is also a decent newsperson and I can stomach a conservative who at least isn't as evil as the neo-cons.

[devilgrrl]

71. Yep. That's when I cut him off too.

At don't agree with his assessment of people on either side, that neither are interested in the truth. Sorry Mr. Brown, it is TV news that isn't interested in the truth - too much work, not sexy enough.

[EFerrari]

75. Aaron Brown is a presstitute and while he was on the air

took any RW posiition that his producer told him to take.

He doesn't belong on a news show.

[FrenchieCat]

25. CNN is worse than the others because many watch it thinking

that is is a more "balanced" cable outfit than the others....but it's not!

Aaron Brown did seem "in pain" sometimes as he parroted the "company line".

Hope he tells the truth, and nothing but the truth from this point on.

I'm so fucking tired of this media, till it ain't even funny!

[jonnyblitz]

33. i am still kind of amused at how much praise he gets at DU...

I just didn't see him as being any different. He seemed to have a prissy, arrogant air about him. maybe that appeals to some. :shrug:

[ecdab]

31. Are there any TV news shows worth watching anymore? n/t

[drone]

46. No

January 1 2005 I watchecd my last newscast and abandoned radio. I am extending it into 2006.

[Sequoia]

53. Welcome Drone!

Do ya...drone on and on. Just kidding. Cheers!

[quaoar]

76. Yes, there is.

CBS Sunday Morning. Great show.

[Kurovski]

84. Keith Olbermann on MSNBC

Part entertainment, part news.

C-SPAN shows many events as they occur with no commentary.

[thebigidea]

32. heh, I thought that was the slogan of his new show

They always seem to develop a conscience when they're unemployed... He would've gladly continued his nightly sound effects to tomorrow's headlines in lieu of real news for a few more decades until they shitcanned him for windbreaker disasterboy...

where were you when it mattered? Who cares what Aaron Brown has to say now? Big fans of unemployed newsmen?

[stepnw1f]

35. And This Is Why the Republicans Win Elections

and this is the number one reason Dems lose.

* still there are issues we need to address in our party

[schmuls]

38. I used to enjoy his newscasts

[AX10]

39. Broadcast "news" in general is crap.

It's intended to make Repubs look good and Dems appear bad.

[Nomen Tuum]

40. Too little and too late Aaron for 2,000+ families with dead children

You sold your soul for 20 pieces of silver Aaron. You lied any lie to send these innocent children to death and there is NOTHING you can do to atone for your actions. Only God can have mercy on your sleazy soul.

[deutsey]

41. Boo fucking hoo, Aaron

Listen to this Democracy Now! interview with him and hear him defend not serving up the "brussel sprouts" of the anti-war perspective:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/04/16/2156256&mode=thread&tid=11

[Jai4WKC08]

42. I used to run hot and cold on Aaron Brown

He was SO much better than most, I think I tend to give him more credit that he deserves. Better than horrible isn't necessarily good.

But that said, he makes an excellent point in this article, where he talks about the " 'mud-wrestling' that skirts substance." It's essentially the same point Jon Stewart was trying to push for a while after his CNN Crossfire appearance... I'm afraid he's given up )but hope not).

Mostly the news networks, cable and broadcast, act as tho they've got "The Truth" covered if they have on air one guy or gal from each side and then let them slug it out. They almost never challenge what one or the other side says, or provide any different information of their own. They think it's enough to pose a question, and if one side lies, it's up to the other to point it out. Assuming they get the chance. But the Repubs are very good at making points that can't be refuted on the spot without some sort of research, so the Dem ends up, at best, saying, Oh I don't think that's right... and looking like an uninformed idiot. So mostly they say nothing and let the Repub get away with the bullshit. It's a big game, and the news execs love it because it saves them the time and money of doing real reporting and it gives the audience conflict not unlike the appeal of a reality tv show.

I say "mostly" because Fox usually doesn't even try to go that far. And when they do, it's when they think they can set up the Democrat to look bad, and it takes a very sharp thinker to side-step the trap. Not many are successful.

A variation of the tactic is, when reporting a story, they pretend "The Truth" means airing an equal number of talking points from either side. One of my favorite examples is when, during the 04 debates, they put up lists of 4-6 errors of fact that each candidate made, and never bothered to inform the audience that Bush made many many more errors than Kerry, or that his errors were more grievous, either because they were further from factual or because they were outright lies instead of a misstatement of some detail. A more obvious example is when they treated the Swiftboat attacks as equally credible to the Dept of Navy documentation that refuted it. All nice and "fair & balanced" and nothing resembling the real truth. But again, cheap to produce. An informed and half-way intelligence citizen can see what they're doing, but how many in the general electorate meet those criteria?

What we end up with is a population who, if they bother to watch the news at all, don't realize that there is such a thing as "The Truth." Or rather, they think it's whatever they want to believe it is, since they can simply choose which side to believe and convince themselves the other side are a bunch or liars or quibblers. Anyone in the middle is likely to think both sides are equally bad, or to be pursueded solely by the personality and demeanor of the speaker, rather than the quality of the information and its source.

So we're living in a bumper-sticker & sound-byte society, where creationism should be taught side-by-side with evolution (let the kids decide), global warming isn't a serious problem and embryonic stem cells offer no solutions (there are "scientists" who tell us so), John Kerry probably didn't earn his medals because 250 Swiftboaters said so and only 11 people (so what if they were actually there) say otherwise, Dems are as guilty of taking Abramoff money as Repubs, and on and on and on. Perhaps worse, any issue that can't be reduced to a catchy one-liner is completely ignored, as is any candidate who tries to give a complete answer to a complex question.

I only wish I knew what the answer is. We can complain about the media, and we'd be right, but nothing will change until the American people demand it and I don't see that happening. The internet has become the only souce of relevant information, but it carries even more garbage and the problem only gets worse.

I'm afraid we were far better off when a handful of responsible journalists told us what was important and what to think about it. They may have got it wrong from time to time, even frequently, but they came a lot closer than what we have now.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

60. The ORIGINAL "Swiftboating" of Kerry in campaign '04 was the best

example of this... here was a group of mudslingers with essentially no substance or ability to verify their claims, but "Swiftboaters" versus Kerry defenders was presented as an either/or, he said she said rather than putting the burden on the Swiftboaters to support their accusations which obviously had a flimsy basis.

If there is a historical record like the Navy's documents and citations, then it should receive the presumption of accuracy and unverified accusations to the contrary should receive the presumption that they are false unless there are obvious substantive backing to them.

But that's not how it works, in the CNN/FOX/MSNBC world these days. Just put everyone on, let 'em shout at each other, and no independent research to ascertain the truth. It's enough to make you weep.

[SoCalDem]

45. The snake parable comes to mind, Aaron..

I hope his foray into "the bigtime", has enlightened hinm, and that he lands on his feet at a REAL newsgathering venue.

telling stories after the fact is not as valuable as telling truth when you have an audience.

[rman]

48. He's basically saying that it was pretty bad, and that it got a lot worse.

I think he's correct.

then:
"I always knew when I got to the Brussels sprouts, I was on thin ice"

now:
"Truth no longer matters"

[Generator]

49. This is probably the most important thread here

Yes, it relates to the Alito confirmation as well. The truth is dead. There is a version of truth that is given on the press..and that is Republican truth. A snippet of Bush last night on my local news, saying "Mr. Alito is a humble man and should be confirmed." It doesn't matter how humble he is, how much is wife cries, how he suffered as a child, how many times a Republicans says that Alito is honest or even intelligent. The facts about his integrity and his intentions to no longer have a true seperation of power are the real question. If that message could even be presented to the American people-as I keep saying Roe V. Wade is the least of it. It's about a president with absolute power, it's about a police state. This isn't really what Americans want. But they are never even given a chance to know about it. They are given false issues, false images, false words.

No matter what we come up with against Bush-the truth about Katrina-the truth about Iraq-the truth about spying on Americans-they other side spouts a lie, or distraction and the truth is utterly lost. The truth isn't partisan and the media presents it as wholly partisan. Without real information there can be no objective truth. Thus, propaganda is winning. Americans don't even know what's happening. Most have no clue what's happening to the future of their rights and privacy that will happen with this stacked court. The only question left is: how far will the court go in letting King George do what he wants and how much war and power do these great Republicans need?

History tells us there is never a stopping point of power until someone forces them to stop.

[AuntiBush]

77. Well Stated, Generator!

You nailed it.

[Sequoia]

51. He should anchor one the other networks.

I liked his professional attitude and delivery. He needs to do a speaking tour.

[Disturbed]

56. Are there any TV news shows worth watching anymore?

Yes. Kieth Olberman.

[Marie26]

55. He's absolutely right.

They're not kind to truth-tellers anymore.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

57. No surprise he got canned from the lying, crotch-sniffing cable news nets

They laugh at the thought of "serious" news and the US is turning into a fucked up fascist country as a result.

[malaise]

58. I miss Aaron big time

he was the last decent journalist at CNN. He is correct.

[slor]

59. He should know, he did enough lie-slinging too...

now that he has been burned, he wants to come clean? Well I say, fuck you ab!

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

62. It would be so much fun to see one of these useless media whores

go all "Howard Beale" on us one evening.

[Voltaire99]

64. "I've lost my high-paying job: oh, the cost to Truth!"

'Tis pity you're a whore, Aaron. But "truth" will carry on, as usual quite far from the vicinity of corporate microphones and cameras.

[Fridays Child]

65. I love how the perp has turned critic.

Where were your ethics, Aaron, when you told us that showing the graphic, nasty truth of the Iraq invasion was in bad taste?

[Tom Rinaldo]

67. He wasn't a liberal anchor but he talked about real news

Sometimes Brown made strong stands, sometimes he didn't, but he actually covered news. The show had been going down hill for at least a year as CNN cut the legs out from under him. I acttually liked News Night before that. I miss Aaron, he didn't seem pompous to me, he seemed droll which could be a hoot if you got on his frequency. Who nowadays is better than Brown was, who has a conventional news show? OK, KO, but Countdown isn't exactly conventional.

[spanone]

68. That's fairly obvious. The question is, what the f do you do about it?

When ratings trump truth, democracy is over.

[bluestateboomer]

69. He' s doing the both sides are "equally bad" dance..

"Many Americans on the left and the right aren't interested in the truth, but simply want news that confirms their viewpoints, he said. "You'd think that it's no more complex than good vs. evil," he said"

Every MSM person seems to think that just giving equal time is exposing the truth. I used to think there were many honorable people on both sides of the political debate. Sadly, experience and the demonization of views I hold and care about deeply, have brought me to the conclusion there is much evil on the other side. Aaron Brown's statement equates those evil ideas with much that is good. I can't see the other side as good anymore.
:mad:

[Bozvotros]

70. Casper Milquetoast now speaks his mind

While he had his show, he straddled the fence and if anything provided comfort and aid to the Right Wing by minimizing their crimes or abstaining from hard questioning. He seemed to be afraid of conviction and controversy and rarely took a stand on anything, even when other cable "news" shows were led by and packed with conservative windbags blathering the party line. IMHO, he was an old soft whore and provided little of real substance for either side in the big debates of the day. Hence he was given the boot.

[threadkillaz]

73. P*ssies wait to leave before they say something.

nt

[emdee]

74. Can he go to Satellite Radio?? nt

nt

[FreedomAngel82]

78. This is probably why he was fired

I wish him, Cronkite, Brokaw, Moyers, Donahue could all get together and make their own network for us to watch.

[autorank]

79. True, but he was ultimately a Douche Bag of Liberty.

2nd to last sentence:

"Many Americans on the left and the right aren't interested in the truth, but simply want news that confirms their viewpoints, he said. "You'd think that it's no more complex than good vs. evil," he said."

See, we're no better than they are...good vs. evil...simpletons...

Aaron, would you like some whine with that cheese? Maybe if you knew what the truth was/is and reported it, you would still have a show.

[grasswire]

80. the first time I ever saw Aaron Brown was 9-11-01

He exhibited pure professionalism on that day, and I believe he made the horror just a bit more bearable because of his calm demeanor. The man just watched with us and only added his words to give quiet updates of information. He was steady as a rock, all day and all night. Incredibly steady. I will always be grateful for that. He helped us on that day.
I did not always agree with him and/or his coverage. But I still am grateful.

[Trevelyan]

81. I'm glad Aaron Brown is speaking out...When I read that CNN had let him go

I visited CNN to send him a message just after I read the DU post but there was no email or mention of his leaving...just like the Egyptians or the Russians, he had become a non-person by CNN just ignoring his leaving and erasing his transcripts.

[Trevelyan]

82. A Reason for the Real Journalists' Silence - Endangering your life to tell

the truth about the bush regime. http://www.haloscan.com/comments/andy8/113687947384619953/==

Rosenbaum's last piece for the TIMES was published on 12/24/2005, and reported that Samuel Alito had authored a 1984 memo arguing that then-President Reagan had the right to order wiretaps without warrants.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/ ab...DAB0994DD404482

Rosenbaum was mugged to death two weeks later, as Alito's confirmation hearings are about to begin?

Small world, isn't it? And full of odd coincidences.
http://www.xymphora.blogspot.com/
"We're beginning to see a subtle but important shift in the Official Story on the death of David Rosenbaum. The chances of one suspect innocently walking into the police station - a place that real bad guys wouldn't get within a mile of - and ending up confessing to murder are infinitesimally small, but the chances of two perps separately walking into the station to end up confessing is completely impossible. Although initial reports are clear that the second guy walked into the station to inquire about the case, the suggestion is now vaguely arising that the second guy was apprehended as a result of information the police received from the first guy. The story is still ridiculous, but not, like the first version, laugh-out-loud ridiculous, so watch for the new subtle change to become part of the Official Story.

"The police would not answer questions about what Mr. Hamlin said in his statement, which was obtained without a lawyer." http://brilliantatbreakfast.blogspot.com/2005/12/looks-like-total-information-awareness.html
I guess 'someone' didn't appreciate light being cast on Alito's creepy 1984 (heh) memo? http://www.livejournal.com/users/mparent7777/5596735.html

"Why is my face on TV?" [e-mail]&subject

[julialnyc]

85. I miss Aaron...... he's a good example of cable news just reaching

for the hottest trend in news (Cooper...... who I thought was great in Katrina, but was better suited for his old gig) and pushing for ratings instead of pushing for answers.

Aaron had so many beautifully respectful stories,and while he did didn't come off a bias, he didn't make the mistake that all current news makes..... treating every story like both sides have the same legitimacy (and letting vultures like Anne Coulter "argue" for one side of the argument).


People are all entitled to their opinion, but the news has forgotten that there is a difference between opinion and facts..... and facts should speak for themselves!