Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

US and the Press during the war...

  • 02-04-2003 3:20pm
    #1
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭


    Yesterday, we had a press conference where a US general came out and basically told the press that they were not helping issues by spreading stories about "failed plans" - and stepped just short of telling them not to do it.

    In the Q&A afterwards, there was a follow-up question where - while the general was framing his reply - Rumsfeld had to quickly step in and say "Remember the First Amendment", getting a laugh from the reporters, and making the general realise that there was no polite way of saying what he clearly wanted to say....

    Yesterday, NBC News fired one of their reporters for giving an unauthorised interview which aired on Iraqi television, where he offered a negative opinion of the US - again, claiming that their initial battle plan had failed, and that the move forward had stalled while a new plan was being formulated, as well as saying that public sentiment against the war was growing.

    The reporter in question - Peter Arnett - won a Pulitzer prize for his reporting in Vietnam, and was heavily involved in reporting the first Gulf War.

    From IMDB: MSNBC President Erik Sorenson told Reuters that he believed Arnett's appearance on Iraqi television to be "arguably unpatriotic." Later, he told the Washington Post that Arnett's interview revealed that "he has these clearly pro-Iraqi or anti-American viewpoints."

    Arnett admitted that the interview was an error of judgement, but felt at the time that it was a matter of professional courtesy to grant it given that he had been carrying out so many interviews himself, and that having done so it behove him to be honest.

    Can anyone tell me is this indicative of the state of US media today, or are these just exceptional cases in exceptional times? If so....when will we return to normality?

    jc


Comments

  • #2
    Hobbes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Well he didn't quite do a Jane Fonda, but I don't see the issue with firing him. The roles had been reversed SH would of been happly flaying the reporter rather then firing them.

    As for the military guy, I didn't see it. I'm sure it's frustrating but fuk it.


Advertisement