Reply With Quote
Or it could just be that whole thing about putting as much as possible about a story out there so that readers/viewers can decide for themselves what to think.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...e173930D42.DTL
Maybe it's just me, but obtaining homemade footage from terrorists killing our soldiers and airing it on U.S. televisions seems a bit...counterproductive. I guess the maximization of profit is more important for CNN.CNN Airs Footage of Iraq Sniper Attacks
By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer
Thursday, October 19, 2006
(10-19) 17:39 PDT New York (AP) --
A CNN executive said Thursday the network's effort to present the "unvarnished truth" about the Iraq war led it to televise portions of a video that shows insurgent snipers targeting U.S. military personnel.
The tape, which came to the network unexpectedly through contact with an insurgent leader, was aired first Wednesday night on "Anderson Cooper 360" and repeated on Thursday.
In one instance, the tape shows a uniformed member of the U.S. military milling in a public area with Iraqis. A shot rings out. CNN fades the screen to black before the result — described as a victim falling forward — is visible.
It's one of 10 separate sniper attacks on Americans do ented on the tape, which CNN technicians concluded was authentic, said David Doss, executive producer of Cooper's show, in a Web log entry describing the network's decision what to show.
CNN could not determine the iden y of any of the sniper victims, spokeswoman Christa Robinson said.
Baghdad correspondent Michael Ware had been in contact through intermediaries with Ibrahim al-Shammari, a leader for the rebel group Islamic Army. Ware had sent al-Shammari a series of questions about the insurgency in Iraq, Doss explained.
In reply, al-Shammari sent two tapes. One reportedly showed him, with face concealed, responding to the questions. The other showed the sniper incidents, seemingly taken by the insurgents themselves, CNN said.
CNN understood that some critics might find that the tape had public relations benefits for the insurgency, Doss wrote.
"We also understood that this kind of footage is upsetting and disturbing for many viewers," he said. "But after getting beyond the emotional debate, we concluded the tape meets our criteria for newsworthiness."
The decision was subject to "hours of intense editorial debate" at CNN's highest levels, he said.
Doss said he had already received several angry responses from viewers of Wednesday's five-minute report, some wondering whether CNN was helping the enemy and others concerned that the tape was inappropriate for young viewers who may have happened upon it.
"Whether or not you agree with us in this case, our goal, as always, is to present the unvarnished truth as best we can," Doss said.
Or it could just be that whole thing about putting as much as possible about a story out there so that readers/viewers can decide for themselves what to think.
If the insurgency had anybody's "benefit" based on the airing of the tapes, they were getting their benefit regardless of the airing.
I am glad CNN did the fade-to-black during the immediate shootings.
What part of the story are we missing here, that we want to watch our troops be killed?
CNN shouldn't be showing this stuff, but hey - maybe it'll remove the stupid RoEs regarding our troops and let them just beat the out of people and kill those who present an actual danger instead of waiting to be attacked.
You don't have to watch. CNN gave ample warning before the airing of the footage.
And as far as Tony Snow saying that the airing of this will break the will of the American people...I disagree.
Seeing something like that pisses me off even more that these insurgents can pick off Coalition soldiers (and like you said, they have to wait before they engage and that's bull ).
EDIT: I misread Snow's statement. His original statement said that the President "worries that insurgents are providing such images in an effort to break the will of the American people," but that they weren't going to work.
The video certainly aids in discouraging military recruiting. The use of snipers is common in war. It's not normally shown on video, though.
US showing video of multiple airstrikes on "targets" is a little less personal than the insurgent video. If the nation hadn't tired of the war in Iraq and US and Allied countries leadership weren't under such severe criticism, that 10-target sniper video would probably not have been presented as news.
If thet threat of the insurgency wasn't there, there would have been no video to begin with.
You know, I've never been in the military and I've always known that it wasn't for me, but I've had many friends and family members in the military, so take my next statement for what it's worth.
I would think if the airing of a video on CNN introduced a thought of possible death while serving your country, you probably wanted to pass on the military in the first place.
That's why CNN didn't air any atrocities going on while Saddam was still in power, to present 'as much as possible'.Or it could just be that whole thing about putting as much as possible about a story out there so that readers/viewers can decide for themselves what to think.
It's gutless and demoralizing what CNN is doing, but then again the same people leading that network and its direction were the ones doing the same against our country and its troops during Vietnam, and it looks like in the end they'll have the same affect.
Pretty pathetic, but that's what you get with the liberal media...
I'm not saying they're perfect and that they haven't screwed up many times before, but isn't it quite possible that the thoughts of what journalism is have changed many times since CNN held back footage to keep their Iraqi credentials.That's why CNN didn't air any atrocities going on while Saddam was still in power, to present 'as much as possible'.
It's gutless and demoralizing what CNN is doing, but then again the same people leading that network and its direction were the ones doing the same against our country and its troops during Vietnam, and it looks like in the end they'll have the same affect.
Pretty pathetic, but that's what you get with the liberal media...
Let me ask this question, then.
If CNN is to be taken to task for not reporting what they could very easily prove in order to keep their credentials, why are some lawmakers asking for CNN's credentials to be pulled based on the airing of this footage? Do they hold the video or show it?
I wish Bush would watch the footage.
If CNN got ahold of a Muhammed/Malvo tape of their sniper killings and aired it on TV and on the website with only the moment of impact blanked out, and then showed the victim falling would that be deemed "newsworthy"?
Americans need to get their heads out of the sand and know what the is going on.
The number of direct attacks(not suicide bombers) on US soldiers has increased 1500% over just one year ago.
The don't shoot unless you are fired upon first policy is asinine, and it is causing a huge loss of life of our soldiers.
I wish Bush would go to Bagdad and sit in the street on a corner and "wait" to be shot at before he does anything about it.
You know what, I don't know what CNN would determine and I can't really answer. I don't know whether or not I would air that footage (the length of time since then would play a large part in my decision).
I keep sitting and typing and realizing that I don't know what I would do in that situation and any attempt to explain that wouldn't truely explain what I'm thinking.
If Bush were to do this and actually go and sit on a street corner, he would have even more in common with Fillmoe's mother.
They don't need to show that war is . We all know that war is . The footage doesn't communicate anything that we didn't already know.
This coming from a coward who likes sending others to fight and die in a war that You want, but won't go fight it yourself.
That is so naive.
We do not know 1% of what the real story is.
This war is bull , and the only person in America that thinks it is going well is Bush. Even his dad knew it would be a huge mistake to take Saddam out of power, which is why he did not do it in 91. Bush is an idiot who has sold us out to the oil companies and Halliburton.
So you think CNN providing the terrorists a service is going to change all that?
Who's the naive one again?
I do believe they can show anything hey want as said by the second ammendment. But that's okay because Bush can just cal them terrorists and torture them for no reason
Do you think the terrorists give a rat's ass about public opinion?
Their job is to inflict terror, that is all they care about. The all want to go to paradise and 72 virgins for eternity......nothing else matters to them. Their lives are a hole, and paradise is the only way out.
You heard the song Me and Bobby Magee?
"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose" They got nothing to lose, we do....hence they have a huge advantage over us.
This war is unwinable, and until you naive people realize that, we will continue to lose American lives and Exxon and Moble(And Bush) will continue to profit from it
Wake up and smell the napalm.
Can't use napalm, it will ignite the oil, then we would have no reason to be there.
napalm is a petrolium product...we need the oil to make it.
Okay, Jim has convinced me. Airing the video was a great idea. I am no longer a naive homer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
