Let’s take a moment to meditate on CNN’s commitment to strict journalistic ethics: Their policy is that it’s okay for them to take, scrutinize, and use the personal property of a murdered person — and against the express wishes of the murdered person’s family — if that property contains “newsworthy tips,” and that anyone who criticizes them for such behavior is “attacking the messenger.” I’m sure it must be possible to descend to some moral point lower than that, but only with exceptional effort.
CNN’s Ethical Sensitivity
4 Responses to CNN’s Ethical Sensitivity
-
pilgrim says:
That is pretty low.
-
Darth Thulhu says:
I get that the journalist’s ideal credo involves asking unpleasant questions and being an unpleasant person in service of getting at the Truth … but if you promise people you are going to refrain from doing something, your trustworthiness is incumbent on not doing it.
The State Department’s deflecting about their complete inability to secure the scene of their consulate doesn’t interest me one way or the other, but the revelation here is that CNN’s sworn word about what it will and won’t broadcast is absolutely worthless. That puts their lack of trustworthiness into sharp focus, and should encourage newsheads to get their reporting elsewhere.
-
I’d only tangentially heard of this but as the guy here who’s actually been a reporter, here’s what CNN reported and the context for your quote (only journalists quote words out of context!), per Buzzfeed:
The diary helped confirm, as the network reported, that Stevens had been worried about the threat of an Al Qaeda attack, and even feared his own name was included on a hit list.
“The blockbuster news contradicted the line the State Department and the administration had been pushing since the horrible tragedy took place almost two weeks ago: that there was no intelligence of a coming attack. In fact, the Ambassador himself was aware of a persistent high level threat against him. ‘Perhaps the real question here,’ CNN responded to the State Department criticism, ‘Is why is the State Department now attacking the messenger.’ ”
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/libya-threatens-clintons-legacy-and-stat
This news is absolutely in the public interest and it was absolutely CNN’s duty to report it once it came to their attention.
I haven’t watched CNN since the time, in 2006, that they interrupted what little coverage they had of the Iraq war (then in its bloodiest phase) for “breaking news” about Anna Nicole Smith. Never again.