http://www.atlargely.com/2007/09/fair-and-balanc.htmlFair and Balanced Death Threats...Well, this is what happens when the media outlets adopt the notion that facts have to have what I call the "flatlander" approach. According to this method, a scientist invited to discuss the shape of planet earth has to appear with someone who thinks the world is flat, so that the news can appear "fair and balanced." Obviously, you see the problem with this approach. The flatland reporting of news has created a middle ground reality in which all facts are simply opinion. On that note, I give you this stunning example of flatlander practices now appearing on CNN.
Having covered the Jena 6 rally of peaceful demonstrations, CNN thought it wise to allow the "other side" to air death threats as a way of being "fair and balanced."
"Later on this day after the rally, CNN actually let on a prominent neo-nazi, Bill White, and allowed him to broadcast a specific threat or call for attack against the Jena 6. At his 'overthrow.com' site (creepily titled libertarian-socialist), they will be posting the home addresses of families in Jena along with a suggestion for any white person to try to bump them off.
http://www.overthrow.com/lsn/news.asp?articleID=10585 Several questions arise here. First, was it ethical for CNN to do this? On one hand, the coverage of the Jena 6 issue was tremendous on Thursday, because this case which clearly has come to be supported by the large majority of the american population was previously only receiving coverage on Democracy Now and regional magazines. The large rally represented something larger than the specific case at hand, but indicated people's strong sentiment that racial injustice in the judicial system and schools is still too widespread and we still need to solve it. Part of full coverage of this issue would be to show both extreme racists, and moderate, stealth racists who wouldn't admit their behavior yet let this sort of case slide by.
At the same time, airing this neo-nazi with his death threats actually could have the effect of encouraging either raging or closeted racists to act on their beliefs and go to hurt some people next week. Is this legal? In California, there are several trials going on at the end of September, over 'conspiracy' indictments against environmental activists, where no crime was ever committed, and it was actually fairly clear that nothing would have happened.
The Coronado trial involved a conspiracy indictment occurred three years after a speech in which an audience member had asked how he had burned something with gasoline a decade earlier. An undercover police officer recorded the question. In the mcDavid trial, an undercover officer gave three young people liquor and they smoked marijuana, and then encouraged them to fantasize about carrying out a campaign of disruption. Even though this was a private conversation where they imagined stealing a jam truck and spilling the contents on the road, McDavid is facing 20 year charges for just talking about making a bomb. Yet neo-nazis can openly do the same thing and make web sites about it and appear on CNN?"
Yelling fire in a crowded movie theater with the INTENTION of causing a stampede and panic, in which people may well be injured is not a responsible use of freedom of speech. I have always said that all rights come with responsibilities. On this point, CNN violated not only all reasonable ethical journalistic boundaries, but may have also put people's lives in danger. This is what comes of non-reporters given roles as "newscasters" where they employ a strategy of reporting that has no responsibility to the viewer or the subject.
But really, why am I shocked. Have you folks seen the line up of racists, anti-Semites, and nearly plastic inflatable talking heads parading around CNN? This does not include actual field correspondents by the way.
MORE
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
