Fox: Journalists used as human shields; CNN says not the case

Damn. Dude lays it on the line!

 

Fox News' slogan should be, "We're the ESPN of news."

 

loved the breakfast line

 

FOX is backpedalling a little bit from this, according to the updated report. I'm curious to see how they handle it in the long run, as this clearly isn't something that'll just go away in a few days if they shut up about it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20110322/ts_yblog_thecutline/cnn-correspondent-slams-fox-over-human-shields-report

How do you not know if you have folks in the field for a particular story? Did they seriously think no one would notice, or just not bother to check internally before they ran with this?

 

I think the subtext from FOX is: Obama is a wimp for not using a free pass to blow up CNN reporters.

 

To Fox News' credit, they've managed to get through this whole Libyan crisis so far without putting a (D) after Gaddafi's name.

 

If a group of foreign reporters are interviewing a Libyan military official they're technically human shields whether they want to be or not. NATO/UN/Arab Nation/Kodos, or whoever is running this thing, isn't going to drop bombs on a room full of reporters if they know they're there.

That said, the Fox guy is an idiot in this one and will probably be out of work soon.

 

Doubtful. If the reporter is sent to Libya they aren't the bottom level reporter. Besides higher ups either OKed the story or created the story by ordering it to be written.

 

The fact that ANY American journalists are accepting access to government facilities belonging to a government that we are essentially at war with, to me is unbelievable. It is ludicrous and dangerous.

The first time one of those reporters gets killed in an air force strike, we will not hear the end of it how American forces and our allies are totally to blame.

I don't buy into this supposedly "heroic" actions by reporters who say they are out to get the truth and willing to get involved in charades like this. It's not just Fox---every TV news network has an angle or motive for doing this stuff other than just pure journalism.

If a reporter is allowing himself or herself to be suckered into going on a tour of a government facility, knowing there are air force strikes coming, then that's their problem, not Fox's, or CNN's, or MSNBC's, etc.

 

We are not at war with Libya. NATO is instituting a no-fly zone.

I don't recall America being blamed for reporters killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What motive do you think the reporters have, other than to gather information as best they can?

 

The big problem I have is that reporters willingly go along with these dictatorial government demands of restrictions, and then report their side of the story.

Oh, they'll add a "We were only allowed to talk to one person ..." or "We were only allowed to go in this one area ..." to their report. But to me, any dictator or government who restricts a reporter from reporting has zero credibility, and should be treated as such.

It's like in the early days of the Afghanistan war. The U.S. would bomb a place and say it was a Taliban stronghold. The Taliban would then lead reporters to the area, show a bunch of dead civilians, and claim the U.S. bombed them. And when the reporters would try to interview other witnesses, the Taliban would shoo them away.

And then, the reports would be "The U.S. says they bombed a Taliban stronghold. But the Taliban says they bombed civilians." Giving equal weight to both sides. Even though one side doesn't allow full free speech.

 

Our and coalition planes have bombed government targets in Libya, but we are not at war with them? OK, whatever.