How low will they go

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
He was on Wolf Blitzer last night, damn I missed it

BLITZER: And Jeff Gannon is joining us now for an exclusive television interview, his first TV interview since leaving his job.

Jeff, thanks very much for joining us.

Should I call you Jeff or James?

GANNON: Please call me Jeff Gannon.

BLITZER: So what -- explain the discrepancy. Your real name is James D. Guckert.

GANNON: Yes. Well, it's pronounced Guckert.

BLITZER: Guckert.

GANNON: It's a professional name. I used it because Jeff Gannon is easier to pronounce and easier to remember.

BLITZER: But you haven't legally changed it?

GANNON: No.

BLITZER: So your driver's license still has Guckert?

GANNON: Absolutely.

BLITZER: So, when you went into the White House and you showed your driver's license, it was under the name Guckert.

GANNON: Absolutely.

BLITZER: And so you just did this because it was easier to pronounce, presumably.

If you didn't do anything wrong, why did you resign?

GANNON: Well, since I asked my question, people that disagree with me have harassed and threatened not only myself, but my family. And I believe that leaving my post would bring that to an end.

BLITZER: When you say they harassed your family, what was going on?

GANNON: Well, the -- on -- I've been receiving threats. People have been stalking me in my neighborhood, have followed me to church, followed me down the street. And then there are phone calls and hate mail that I've gotten over the Internet.

And it's been very troubling. And when it went toward my family, then I said that I needed to put an end to it.

BLITZER: And when you say your family, could you be a little bit more...

GANNON: Well, I mean -- I mean my -- when my mother and my brother and his wife received telephone calls that -- you know, that contained threats and all kinds of terrible things being said about me, it's very disturbing. And that's way over the line. And I needed to put that to an end.

BLITZER: Because one of the things, as you know, that were said is that you had some sexually explicit Web sites that you were working on. I don't understand what that is, but maybe you could explain that.

GANNON: Well, several years ago, before I came to Washington, I had registered various domain names for a private client. I was doing Web site development. Those sites were never hosted. There's -- nothing ever went up on them. And the client went on to do something else.

There's been so much about me on the Internet that people have, you know, made assumptions about. And I just can't -- I don't even know them all and I can't address them all here.

BLITZER: I was going to say, were you there in the White House briefing room on a daily basis to try to change the subject, if you will, send softball questions to Scott McClellan, the press secretary? Or were you there as a real journalist trying to get the story?

GANNON: Well, Talon News is a legitimate conservative online news service. And my questions are things that my readers, 700,000 daily subscribed readers, want the answer to. And those are my questions.

I created the questions. Nobody fed questions to me. Scott McClellan certainly never knew what was coming. He knows -- he certainly knows...

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Because you wore your politics on your sleeve. Everyone knew you were very conservative.

GANNON: Absolutely.

BLITZER: Why did you not get credentials, real credentials, from Capitol Hill from the U.S. Congress?

GANNON: Well, I made an attempt to do that originally when I was going to be covering Washington for Talon News. Our business -- Talon News' business model didn't fit the criteria of the Senate Press Gallery. And while we've been trying to comply, I couldn't stop doing the news. So I went on the basis of a daily pass. And that's -- it's all under the procedures that the White House has established for that.

BLITZER: What's the connection between GOPUSA, the political Web site, and the Talon News Service? It's owned by the same wealthy Texas Republican.

GANNON: I wouldn't say wealthy. I don't know that to be true or not. But...

BLITZER: Bobby Eberle.

GANNON: Bobby Eberle.

But it's common ownership. That's all. Talon News is a separate, independent news division. I work for Talon News. I write articles for Talon News. And that's it.

BLITZER: So what are you going to do now?

GANNON: Well, there's -- you know, God closes doors and opens windows. And I believe this is going to be a good opportunity for me, even though it's been painful. And I'm going -- I believe that there's a silver lining out there.

BLITZER: Do you have something already in the works?

GANNON: I've had some people call and make inquiries to see if I had any interest in certain positions.

BLITZER: Jeff Gannon, thanks very much.

GANNON: Thank you, Wolf.
 
Blitzer was such a girlie reporter in that interview. Why not ask how he got past Secret Service and FBI review? How was he able to see the Valerie Plame documents and who showed them to him? What client of his needed porn sites and is he a Web developer or a journalist?
 
come on guys, the media is LIBERAL! didn't you hear that? LIBERAL! LIBERAL! LIBERAL! by giving "Gannon" softball questions of the same nature taht Mr. "Gannon" threw at Bush, Wolf was actually breaking through the liberal stranglehold that CNN keeps on all its anchors and reporters and finally giving us some "fair and balanced" coverage.
 
Will there be any political consequences? I doubt it. Everything seems to bounce off of this administration and this president (i.e. Abu Gharib, no WMDs, huge deficits, etc.). I think if there's any White House linkage back to the leak on the CIA operative, then there may be trouble, but the media doesn't seem to be pushing that angle too hard (maybe because the investigators are targeting some journalists to reveal their sources).
 
http://lautenberg.senate.gov/~lautenberg/press/2003/01/2005210903.html

WASHINGTON, DC -- In light of yet another scandal involving the Bush administration's manipulation of the media, United States Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today requested from White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan all the documents relating to the press credentials of James. D. Guckert, a.k.a. "Jeff Gannon"; the "journalist" now famous for being the White House correspondent for his softball questioning of President Bush and various Administration spokespeople.

"I am writing to request that you immediately release documents to my office relating to the White House press credentials of James D. Guckert, a.k.a. "Jeff Gannon." Specifically, I am seeking documentation related to the question of which name Mr. Guckert/Gannon used when applying for credentials, and which name was on the official White House press credentials he received," wrote Lautenberg.

"As you may know, Mr. Guckert/Gannon was denied a Congressional press pass because he could not show that he wrote for a valid news organization. Given the fact that he was denied Congressional credentials, I seek your explanation of how Mr. Guckert/Gannon passed muster for White House press credentials," Lautenberg wrote.
 
I have to think that eventually a scandal is going to really hurt the president, despite all that his handlers do to protect him from his own bad judgement.

That's how I can sleep at night.
 
I guess that Eason Jordan is a victim of the VRWC as well, forced from his job by the pajamajahadeen.
CNN News Executive Eason Jordan Quits

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer

NEW YORK - CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan quit Friday amidst a furor over remarks he made in Switzerland last month about journalists killed by the U.S. military in Iraq

Jordan said he was quitting to avoid CNN being "unfairly tarnished" by the controversy.

During a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum (news - web sites) last month, Jordan said he believed that several journalists who were killed by coalition forces in Iraq had been targeted.

He quickly backed off the remarks, explaining that he meant to distinguish between journalists killed because they were in the wrong place where a bomb fell, for example, and those killed because they were shot at by American forces who mistook them for the enemy.

"I never meant to imply U.S. forces acted with ill intent when U.S. forces accidentally killed journalists, and I apologize to anyone who thought I said or believed otherwise," Jordan said in a memo to fellow staff members at CNN.

But the damage had been done, compounded by the fact that no transcript of his actual remarks has turned up. There was an online petition calling on CNN to find a transcript, and fire Jordan if he said the military had intentionally killed journalists.
Click to expand...
I would still like to see that video of what he said, his earlier comments about his belief that journalists had been both deliberately killed and tortured by US soldiers in Iraq without producing evidence to substantiate.
 
Last edited:
A_Wanderer said:
Just out of interest how many of you think that the media uses kid gloves with this administration?
Click to expand...


i do. it's still 9-11 fallout, and the fact that the media is more obsessed with lurid scandal than actual scandal. they need interns and blowjobs in order to feign outrage, as opposed to, say, ignored memos and blatant, unethical (if not illegal) media manipulation.
 
I agree...the media is handling Bush with kid gloves but it's not just because of 9/11. Bush plays favorites and if you start asking tough questions, he moves you to the back of the room and never calls on you again. Helen Thomas is a great example -- has worked since I believe Kennedy covering the White House. She is the most senior reporter there and therefore always gets a front row seat and the first question at a press conference. She asked Bush a tough question and was moved to the back as a warning. You'll notice she doesn't get the first question anymore.

The big issue here is that the media goes after a seat in that briefing room like it's gold only to find out that Bush stuffed it with his own guy. The media is pissed -- the coveted seats are not going to real reporters and this once again tarnishes the reputation of the media after those two columnists admitted to getting paid by the admin. This is going to have legs if only because it hits at the heart of the first amendment and the people that amendment protects. At least that's what I hope.

The other issue is that this is easy to understand. The guy is clearly a plant. There are no "torture is ok sometimes" documents to muddy the water, no complicated bills in Congress, no foreign countries involved, simple straight and easy. Blow job, press pass. Both are easy to understand.

The NY Times already ran a story on this guy even though the original news broke Tuesday morning on a blog. Less than a week and easy to explain...this one may not go away.
 
Lately, the media's been very passive when it comes to Social Security. Letting all Repubs, including the president, routinely get away with the line that SS will be "flat broke" by 2042, which is not the truth. I don't think it's because they're scared of the president or this administration...it's just laziness.
 
'Gannon' Interview: No Plame Subpoena, No Tie to White House, He Says

By Joe Strupp

Published: February 11, 2005 4:05 PM ET

NEW YORK In a lengthy, wide-ranging interview with E&P today, former White House reporter Jeff Gannon, whose real name is James D. Guckert, revealed that, contrary to many media reports, he has not been subpoenaed in the Valerie Plame/CIA case.

He also threw into question media accounts suggesting that he had seen a classified CIA document critical to the Plame case, saying he had made references to the “internal memo,” but adding, “I never said I had it or had seen it.” But when asked if he had in fact seen it, he declined to say.

Gannon/Guckert earlier this week resigned his reporting position for Talon News, a Web site run by a Republican activist.

In the interview with E&P, Guckert also:

• explicitly denied ties to White House officials,and claimed he had met Karl Rove just once, at a party;

• said that the presidential press conference two weeks ago that brought him to public attention was not the first he had attended, but rather the fourth, and that he’d managed to ask President Bush a question once before; and

• acknowledged he had been turned down for a Capitol Hill press pass not once but multiple times.

Guckert quit earlier this week after bloggers revealed that he had been reporting from the White House under an alias. They also alleged that he might have been “planted” by White House operatives to provide a positive spin for the administration, and they showed that he had helped set up several sexually oriented Web sites. His connections to the Plame case have now gained increasing attention.

Although Press Secretary Scott McClellan and others at the White House knew that Gannon was not his real name, they always referred to him by that name, he said in the interview. "My professional name is Jeff Gannon, and that is what people called me,” he explained, adding, in an odd reference, “It is like Kirk Douglas, they do not refer to him when they meet him by his real name."

Guckert said he was 47 years old, had never been married, and has no children. He revealed that he'd used the Gannon name since 2001 and vowed to keep using it. "Absolutely; it is my professional name,” he said. “I would be throwing away all of the things I built up over the past few years if I stopped using it."
Click to expand...
linkage

This interview goes over what he says, now this is important because he may well be lying through his teeth, what evidence is there that he is a Karl Rove plant?
 
Last edited:
The latest on this scandal is that he was also a male prostitiute, a tax dodger, and other white house reporters have stated that he held a regular pass not a daily.

It may not be Rove's plant, but everyone else has denied it. This should be investigated thoroughly, if only as a security risk. The story finally made it to CNN after over a week.
 
anyone want to hear a really juicy, totally unsubstantiated rumor about how Mr. "Ganon" got inside the press room?

:mac:
 
as i said, this is just a theory/rumor, and total conjecture, but it yields a plausible scenario. what didn’t make sense before was this:

1) allowing a gay escort access to the white house press conferences

2) the constant day passes rather then a longer term pass

3) the fake name and mclellan playing along

4) the sudden creation of talon news (i believe it had been in existence for 4 days before Gannon got a WH pass).

the idea that this was done so that mclellan had a “go to guy” when the heat was on didn’t make much sense - gannon was a timebomb.

let's also talk about Scott McClelland.

this scandal has revived Washington whispers that the supposedly anti-gay Republican Party is really nothing less than a gay affirmative action program -- these days, it looks like a Harvey Fierstein deeply closeted cocktail party. a few months ago, activist Mike Rogers revealed that GOP National Field Director Dan Gurley is gay and sought unsafe sex online. Rogers also revealed that Ken Mehlman, chair of the RNC, is gay.

this week, the Internet news site Raw Story posted allegations that White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan may be gay and suggested he is a common fixture at Texas gay bars: "He was often seen in gay clubs in Austin and was comfortable being there," an anonymous source told Raw Story. "He's been seen in places that normal people who are looking for heterosexual relationships are not seen alone."

perhaps gannon either convinced a lover to do him a favor, or maybe he was blackmailing mclellan. if Gannon had some sort of leverage, then the story makes a lot more sense. there might be other explanations, but the blackmail theory makes more sense then the go-to-guy theory.

1) gannon says he’s going to go public about mclellan; that he has proof. he wants out of the escort business and into journalism but he can’t get into the house/senate areas.

2) mclellan tells him to do this talon news site (or has others set that up for him) and then says he’ll call on gannon and get him into the press conferences.

3) they do the fake name to hide gannon’s past.

4) for two years it seems to work fine and then it all falls apart.
it’s just a theory. it could have worked out loads of other ways. but like i said, it makes more sense then the theory that gannon is just a go-to guy

just a conspiracy theory.

but oh-so much fun!
 
Now I remember, I read that Raw Story thing a few days ago.

Interesting..As The WH Turns

Queer As Press Secretaries :wink:

It's irrelevant to me if Scott is gay, but obviously if it leads to blackmail and inappropriate shenanigans re press passes that's not good. Of course if he's straight those things could still happen. But the gay theories are plausible I suppose.
 
and to further add fuel to this conspiracy, below is a sample of Gannon in action at a 2004 White House press briefing. apparently, McClellan was, as the Washington Post's Dan Froomkin put it: "getting hammered with questions about the 9/11 commission and the possible inappropriate juxtaposition of a visit to a 9/11 memorial with a fundraiser."

then along comes white night Jeff Gannon with administration-blessed access:

McClellan: "Go ahead, Jeff."

Gannon: "Thank you. First of all, I hope the grand jury didn't force you to turn over the wedding card I sent to you and your wife. (Laughter.) Do you see any hypocrisy in the controversy about the President's mention of 9/11 in his ads, when Democratic icon Franklin Delano Roosevelt's campaign issued this button, that says, 'Remember Pearl Harbor'? I have a visual aid for folks watching at home."

McClellan: "You're pointing out some historical facts. Obviously, Pearl Harbor was a defining moment back in the period of World War II, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt was strongly committed to winning World War II and talked about it frequently."

Gannon: "So you think it certainly is valid that the President does talk about it and --"
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
Now I remember, I read that Raw Story thing a few days ago.

Interesting..As The WH Turns

Queer As Press Secretaries :wink:

It's irrelevant to me if Scott is gay, but obviously if it leads to blackmail and inappropriate shenanigans re press passes that's not good. Of course if he's straight those things could still happen. But the gay theories are plausible I suppose.
Click to expand...


and this is what can be so fun about Washington.

last year, the guy who cuts my hair insisted that Scott was gay.

and lo and behold ... perhaps (and, again, this is all RUMOR! INNUENDO! NON-FACT! like WMDs in Iraq ...) he was right.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
Hairdressers always have all the dirt :wink:

So Scott is married?
Click to expand...


no idea ... it often doesn't make much of a difference, and i don't think it's commented on, and if Gannon was a plant, or a blackmailer, than maybe he agreed to mention Scott's wedding as part of the deal or something.

truth is, no clue.

but why not speculate?
 
I see your point(what the connection could be about Gannon mentioning that), I just wouldn't want to offend anyone who is gay by speculating about that sort of thing, if they would be offended by that. Maybe I'm just being too paranoid or something..

On a totally irrelevant side note, I wish Kyan Douglas could be my hairdresser :drool: :wink:
 
Hmm...when it comes to plausibility, i think that the "plant" theory is more believable than the potential "blackmailing" theory. That's a weird thing to ask as a blackmailer: "I want access to White House press conferences so i can make you guys look good. If you don't do it, i'll show everyone nekkid pictures of you and another guy."

The fact that so many of Gannon's questions were softballs (no pun intended) provides some credence to the plant theory.

Even if WH is completely innocent here from any wrongdoing, the perception that they did something is getting more and more ingrained.
 
Judah said:
Hmm...when it comes to plausibility, i think that the "plant" theory is more believable than the potential "blackmailing" theory. That's a weird thing to ask as a blackmailer: "I want access to White House press conferences so i can make you guys look good. If you don't do it, i'll show everyone nekkid pictures of you and another guy."

The fact that so many of Gannon's questions were softballs (no pun intended) provides some credence to the plant theory.
Click to expand...


yeah, but say someone wanted to switch careers and get out of, you know, prostitution.

and there's much, much more money to be made in Right Wing "journalism" than there is in actual jouranlism.
 
LOL

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/arts/20rich.html?th=&pagewanted=print&position=

The White House Stages Its 'Daily Show'

HE prayers of those hoping that real television news might take its cues from Jon Stewart were finally answered on Feb. 9, 2005. A real newsman borrowed a technique from fake news to deliver real news about fake news in prime time.

Let me explain.

On "Countdown," a nightly news hour on MSNBC, the anchor, Keith Olbermann, led off with a classic "Daily Show"-style bit: a rapid-fire montage of sharply edited video bites illustrating the apparent idiocy of those in Washington. In this case, the eight clips stretched over a year in the White House briefing room - from February 2004 to late last month - and all featured a reporter named "Jeff." In most of them, the White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, says "Go ahead, Jeff," and "Jeff" responds with a softball question intended not to elicit information but to boost President Bush and smear his political opponents. In the last clip, "Jeff" is quizzing the president himself, in his first post-inaugural press conference of Jan. 26. Referring to Harry Reid and Hillary Clinton, "Jeff" asks, "How are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?"

If we did not live in a time when the news culture itself is divorced from reality, the story might end there: "Jeff," you'd assume, was a lapdog reporter from a legitimate, if right-wing, news organization like Fox, and you'd get some predictable yuks from watching a compressed video anthology of his kissing up to power. But as Mr. Olbermann explained, "Jeff Gannon," the star of the montage, was a newsman no more real than a "Senior White House Correspondent" like Stephen Colbert on "The Daily Show" and he worked for a news organization no more real than The Onion. Yet the video broadcast by Mr. Olbermann was not fake. "Jeff" was in the real White House, and he did have those exchanges with the real Mr. McClellan and the real Mr. Bush.

"Jeff Gannon's" real name is James D. Guckert. His employer was a Web site called Talon News, staffed mostly by volunteer Republican activists. Media Matters for America, the liberal press monitor that has done the most exhaustive research into the case, discovered that Talon's "news" often consists of recycled Republican National Committee and White House press releases, and its content frequently overlaps with another partisan site, GOPUSA, with which it shares its owner, a Texas delegate to the 2000 Republican convention. Nonetheless, for nearly two years the White House press office had credentialed Mr. Guckert, even though, as Dana Milbank of The Washington Post explained on Mr. Olbermann's show, he "was representing a phony media company that doesn't really have any such thing as circulation or readership."

How this happened is a mystery that has yet to be solved. "Jeff" has now quit Talon News not because he and it have been exposed as fakes but because of other embarrassing blogosphere revelations linking him to sites like hotmilitarystud.com and to an apparently promising career as an X-rated $200-per-hour "escort." If Mr. Guckert, the author of Talon News exclusives like "Kerry Could Become First Gay President," is yet another link in the boundless network of homophobic Republican closet cases, that's not without interest. But it shouldn't distract from the real question - that is, the real news - of how this fake newsman might be connected to a White House propaganda machine that grows curiouser by the day. Though Mr. McClellan told Editor & Publisher magazine that he didn't know until recently that Mr. Guckert was using an alias, Bruce Bartlett, a White House veteran of the Reagan-Bush I era, wrote on the nonpartisan journalism Web site Romenesko, that "if Gannon was using an alias, the White House staff had to be involved in maintaining his cover." (Otherwise, it would be a rather amazing post-9/11 security breach.)

By my count, "Jeff Gannon" is now at least the sixth "journalist" (four of whom have been unmasked so far this year) to have been a propagandist on the payroll of either the Bush administration or a barely arms-length ally like Talon News while simultaneously appearing in print or broadcast forums that purport to be real news. Of these six, two have been syndicated newspaper columnists paid by the Department of Health and Human Services to promote the administration's "marriage" initiatives. The other four have played real newsmen on TV. Before Mr. Guckert and Armstrong Williams, the talking head paid $240,000 by the Department of Education, there were Karen Ryan and Alberto Garcia. Let us not forget these pioneers - the Woodward and Bernstein of fake news. They starred in bogus reports ("In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting," went the script) pretending to "sort through the details" of the administration's Medicare prescription-drug plan in 2004. Such "reports," some of which found their way into news packages distributed to local stations by CNN, appeared in more than 50 news broadcasts around the country and have now been deemed illegal "covert propaganda" by the Government Accountability Office.

The money that paid for both the Ryan-Garcia news packages and the Armstrong Williams contract was siphoned through the same huge public relations firm, Ketchum Communications, which itself filtered the funds through subcontractors. A new report by Congressional Democrats finds that Ketchum has received $97 million of the administration's total $250 million P.R. kitty, of which the Williams and Ryan-Garcia scams would account for only a fraction. We have yet to learn precisely where the rest of it ended up.

Even now, we know that the fake news generated by the six known shills is only a small piece of the administration's overall propaganda effort. President Bush wasn't entirely joking when he called the notoriously meek March 6, 2003, White House press conference on the eve of the Iraq invasion "scripted" while it was still going on. (And "Jeff Gannon" apparently wasn't even at that one). Everything is scripted.

The pre-fab "Ask President Bush" town hall-style meetings held during last year's campaign (typical question: "Mr. President, as a child, how can I help you get votes?") were carefully designed for television so that, as Kenneth R. Bazinet wrote last summer in New York's Daily News, "unsuspecting viewers" tuning in their local news might get the false impression they were "watching a completely open forum." A Pentagon Office of Strategic Influence, intended to provide propagandistic news items, some of them possibly false, to foreign news media was shut down in 2002 when it became an embarrassing political liability. But much more quietly, another Pentagon propaganda arm, the Pentagon Channel, has recently been added as a free channel for American viewers of the Dish Network. Can a Social Security Channel be far behind?

It is a brilliant strategy. When the Bush administration isn't using taxpayers' money to buy its own fake news, it does everything it can to shut out and pillory real reporters who might tell Americans what is happening in what is, at least in theory, their own government. Paul Farhi of The Washington Post discovered that even at an inaugural ball he was assigned "minders" - attractive women who wouldn't give him their full names - to let the revelers know that Big Brother was watching should they be tempted to say anything remotely off message.

The inability of real journalists to penetrate this White House is not all the White House's fault. The errors of real news organizations have played perfectly into the administration's insidious efforts to blur the boundaries between the fake and the real and thereby demolish the whole notion that there could possibly be an objective and accurate free press. Conservatives, who supposedly deplore post-modernism, are now welcoming in a brave new world in which it's a given that there can be no empirical reality in news, only the reality you want to hear (or they want you to hear). The frequent fecklessness of the Beltway gang does little to penetrate this Washington smokescreen. For a case in point, you needed only switch to CNN on the day after Mr. Olbermann did his fake-news-style story on the fake reporter in the White House press corps.

"Jeff Gannon" had decided to give an exclusive TV interview to a sober practitioner of by-the-book real news, Wolf Blitzer. Given this journalistic opportunity, the anchor asked questions almost as soft as those "Jeff" himself had asked in the White House. Mr. Blitzer didn't question Mr. Guckert's outrageous assertion that he adopted a fake name because "Jeff Gannon is easier to pronounce and easier to remember." (Is "Jeff" easier to pronounce than his real first name, Jim?). Mr. Blitzer never questioned Gannon/Guckert's assertion that Talon News "is a separate, independent news division" of GOPUSA. Only in a brief follow-up interview a day later did he ask Gannon/Guckert to explain why he was questioned by the F.B.I. in the case that may send legitimate reporters to jail: Mr. Guckert has at times implied that he either saw or possessed a classified memo identifying Valerie Plame as a C.I.A. operative. Might that memo have come from the same officials who looked after "Jeff Gannon's" press credentials? Did Mr. Guckert have any connection with CNN's own Robert Novak, whose publication of Ms. Plame's name started this investigation in the first place? The anchor didn't go there.

The "real" news from CNN was no news at all, but it's not as if any of its competitors did much better. The "Jeff Gannon" story got less attention than another media frenzy - that set off by the veteran news executive Eason Jordan, who resigned from CNN after speaking recklessly at a panel discussion at Davos, where he apparently implied, at least in passing, that American troops deliberately targeted reporters. Is the banishment of a real newsman for behaving foolishly at a bloviation conference in Switzerland a more pressing story than that of a fake newsman gaining years of access to the White House (and network TV cameras) under mysterious circumstances? With real news this timid, the appointment of Jon Stewart to take over Dan Rather's chair at CBS News could be just the jolt television journalism needs. As Mr. Olbermann demonstrated when he borrowed a sharp "Daily Show" tool to puncture the "Jeff Gannon" case, the only road back to reality may be to fight fake with fake.
 
Great story, Scarletwine. Thanks for posting that.

It'll be interesting to see if this does end up having a "sex" angle. I wonder if the media (and Wolf Blitzer) will show the same, um, journalistic lust as they did during the Monica affair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
NBA 2022-23 Thread
46 47 48
Replies
1K
Views
45K
U2inUtah
U2inUtah
MrsSpringsteen
Fox News, Fake News!
Replies
4
Views
709
dazzledbylight
dazzledbylight
MrsSpringsteen
Police Brutality Against 73 Year Old Woman With Dementia
Replies
4
Views
584
dazzledbylight
dazzledbylight
LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 2 Listening Thread
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
6K
namkcuR
N
A
the little stranger chapter 2
Replies
0
Views
537
annj
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom