Friday, October 27, 2006
Repubs Still Whining Over CNN Airing Sniper Video
Source: Broadcasting and Cable Lynne Cheney, wife of Vice President Dick Cheney, strongly criticized CNN Friday for its "Broken Government" series of specials in the run-up to the November mid-term elections and for its airing of tapes of snipers shooting American soldiers in Iraq.
In an interview with Situation Room anchor Wolf Blitzer, Cheney said the network's Vote 2006 specials contained "terrible distortions of the president's and vice president's positions on many issues."
She suggested CNN was working from Democratic talking points, and took issue with the negative tone of the title "Broken Government," suggesting it betrayed CNN's bias and countering that the administration had inherited a recession, been through some tough times like 9/11 and Katrina, but that the economy was healthy. "That's not broken, " she said, "this government has acted very well... I shouldn't let media bias surprise me, but I worked for CNN once [with Crossfire, according to Blitzer], and I was troubled.
Blitzer said the series was "probably" meant to be provocative, "to get people to think, to get people to discuss these issues."
Cheney turned the tables on Blitzer, becoming the questioner: "what is CNN doing running tapes of terrorists shooting Americans," she asked more than once, repeating a question CNN had been asked: "Do you want us to win?"
"The answer is, of course, we want the United States to win," said Blitzer. "We are Americans." Blitzer said airing the footage was not terrorist propaganda but "reporting the news. This is what we do... We make no apologies for showing it."
Later in the newscast, Lou Dobbs defended the "Broken Borders" series, saying that with all due respect, the government was broken in many respects and that he had been critical of Republicans and Democrats. He called Cheney's criticisms "power bridling at truth."
Cheney also complained that she wanted to talk about her children's book, Our 50 States, but had spent about 10 of the 15 alloted minutes for the interview responding to questions about her husband's comments about tactics used to question detainees and the citing of some passages of a book she wrote by Democratic Virginia Senate candidate Jim Webb in defending some racy passages in his books. She said Webb was "full of baloney."
Watch video HERE
In an interview with Situation Room anchor Wolf Blitzer, Cheney said the network's Vote 2006 specials contained "terrible distortions of the president's and vice president's positions on many issues."
She suggested CNN was working from Democratic talking points, and took issue with the negative tone of the title "Broken Government," suggesting it betrayed CNN's bias and countering that the administration had inherited a recession, been through some tough times like 9/11 and Katrina, but that the economy was healthy. "That's not broken, " she said, "this government has acted very well... I shouldn't let media bias surprise me, but I worked for CNN once [with Crossfire, according to Blitzer], and I was troubled.
Blitzer said the series was "probably" meant to be provocative, "to get people to think, to get people to discuss these issues."
Cheney turned the tables on Blitzer, becoming the questioner: "what is CNN doing running tapes of terrorists shooting Americans," she asked more than once, repeating a question CNN had been asked: "Do you want us to win?"
"The answer is, of course, we want the United States to win," said Blitzer. "We are Americans." Blitzer said airing the footage was not terrorist propaganda but "reporting the news. This is what we do... We make no apologies for showing it."
Later in the newscast, Lou Dobbs defended the "Broken Borders" series, saying that with all due respect, the government was broken in many respects and that he had been critical of Republicans and Democrats. He called Cheney's criticisms "power bridling at truth."
Cheney also complained that she wanted to talk about her children's book, Our 50 States, but had spent about 10 of the 15 alloted minutes for the interview responding to questions about her husband's comments about tactics used to question detainees and the citing of some passages of a book she wrote by Democratic Virginia Senate candidate Jim Webb in defending some racy passages in his books. She said Webb was "full of baloney."
Watch video HERE
# posted by ATN @ 11:48 PM 
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Quest to Host Rota Charity Gala Dinner
Source: The Peninsula Well-known international media personality Richard Quest and CNN anchor is to be the official Master of Ceremonies for the second year running at next month's Reach Out To Asia (Rota) charity Gala Dinner, a release said.# posted by ATN @ 12:58 AM
Virginia Republican Wants CNN Pulled From Airwaves
Well so much for freedom of the press..now Republicans want CNN pulled from cable systems and satellite systems. I think some of these lawmakers are drinking from a bad jug of kool-aid. That's it, decide what others should be watching. Anyway the story is below.
Source: Potomac News Woodbridge's state delegate, a retired U.S. Army colonel and veteran of the Gulf War, has asked cable and satellite providers in Virginia to drop Cable News Network from their systems.
Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Woodbridge, said CNN should be dropped from Virginia's airwaves for televising a video of an Iraqi insurgent shooting a U.S. soldier dead.
He called the airing of the video "despicable."
"I'm a combat veteran and there is nothing more devastating to morale than when the media, particularly CNN, pulls stunts like this," Lingamfelter said in an interview Wednesday.
He wrote a letter to presidents and CEOs of eight cable and satellite providers in Virginia regarding the Oct. 18 show, which he said provided a platform for terrorist propaganda.
"I call on you today to take immediate steps to drop CNN from your broadcasts," Lingamfelter wrote in the Oct. 23 letter. "They must understand that this kind of incomparably bad judgment cannot and will not be condoned by responsible broadcasters."
Recipients of the letter were either not available or had not received the letter yet.
CNN aired portions of two videos provided by a spokesman for the Islamic Army in Iraq during the Anderson Cooper 360 show.
"This is not a free speech issue," he said.
Lingamfelter said his ire was directed at the portion where a sniper shot an unidentified U.S. soldier. The screen went black when the soldier was hit, but audio of the gunshot remained.
"Do they believe it is a good broadcast practice to show the enemies of this country killing the sons and daughters of American moms and dads?" Lingamfelter asked. "I'm coming at this thing as a soldier. This is very personal to me. I trained a lot of the kids over there. This war is very personal to me."
Lingamfelter, a 28-year Army veteran, warned cable and satellite executives in a press release that if they come before the House Finance Committee, on which he sits, he'll keep their broadcasting repertoire in mind.
"I can assure you that responsible broadcasting will be a factor in how I address broadcast policy issues in Virginia," Lingamfelter said in the release.
Source: Potomac News Woodbridge's state delegate, a retired U.S. Army colonel and veteran of the Gulf War, has asked cable and satellite providers in Virginia to drop Cable News Network from their systems.
Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Woodbridge, said CNN should be dropped from Virginia's airwaves for televising a video of an Iraqi insurgent shooting a U.S. soldier dead.
He called the airing of the video "despicable."
"I'm a combat veteran and there is nothing more devastating to morale than when the media, particularly CNN, pulls stunts like this," Lingamfelter said in an interview Wednesday.
He wrote a letter to presidents and CEOs of eight cable and satellite providers in Virginia regarding the Oct. 18 show, which he said provided a platform for terrorist propaganda.
"I call on you today to take immediate steps to drop CNN from your broadcasts," Lingamfelter wrote in the Oct. 23 letter. "They must understand that this kind of incomparably bad judgment cannot and will not be condoned by responsible broadcasters."
Recipients of the letter were either not available or had not received the letter yet.
CNN aired portions of two videos provided by a spokesman for the Islamic Army in Iraq during the Anderson Cooper 360 show.
"This is not a free speech issue," he said.
Lingamfelter said his ire was directed at the portion where a sniper shot an unidentified U.S. soldier. The screen went black when the soldier was hit, but audio of the gunshot remained.
"Do they believe it is a good broadcast practice to show the enemies of this country killing the sons and daughters of American moms and dads?" Lingamfelter asked. "I'm coming at this thing as a soldier. This is very personal to me. I trained a lot of the kids over there. This war is very personal to me."
Lingamfelter, a 28-year Army veteran, warned cable and satellite executives in a press release that if they come before the House Finance Committee, on which he sits, he'll keep their broadcasting repertoire in mind.
"I can assure you that responsible broadcasting will be a factor in how I address broadcast policy issues in Virginia," Lingamfelter said in the release.
# posted by ATN @ 12:47 AM
Discussion Gets Heated During San Antonio Town Hall Meeting
Wednesday night Lou Dobbs hosted a town hall meeting CNN America Votes 2006 Special: Broken Borders, live from the Empire Theater in San Antonio, Texas. Topics ranged from border security to immigrant rights to Mexico’s responsibility with panelists and experts answering questions from the audience and Lou. Below is a transcript of a portion of the program that got heated and caught my ear:
ROSALES: We're not being invaded, you know? What's all this hysteria?
Is it because the Latino population is growing in such great numbers that we fear the voting power?
DOBBS: Oh, Rosa.
ROSALES: That we fear the...
(APPLAUSE)
DOBBS: All right. Rosa, I was so proud of you. Rosa, I was so proud of you, and then you bring up race.
Rosa, as of now I have no interest...
ROSALES: What did President Reagan tell Gorbachev. What did he say?
DOBBS: Rosa.
ROSALES: Tear down that wall!
And now we want to build walls.
DOBBS: Rosa, what is the responsibility of the Mexican government here? That was the question.
ROSALES: I think there is a responsibility, Mexico and the United States need to work together to get meaningful immigration reform for this country. You're right.
DOBBS: Aren't you afraid -- aren't you afraid that the government of Mexico will consider you somewhat patronizing and condescending, perhaps even racist, to suggest that Mexico cannot take responsibility for its own problems?
ROSALES: I don't think so. I don't think so. And as a matter of fact, I'm going meet with President Calderon, OK?
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: You have a hoot.
I'm going want to turn to you, John. What is your answer to the question?
JOHN TRASVINA, INTERIM PRESIDENT, MALDEF: Lou, if you had wanted the perspective of the government of Mexico, you should have brought the government of Mexico here. Soles Americanos (ph). We're Americans, just the same as everyone else on this panel.
DOBBS: I'm sorry, you're what? Say that again?
TRASVINA: We're Americans, the same as everyone else.
DOBBS: Is that in dispute?
TRASVINA: It is when you're asking us about what the government of Mexico -- you should have brought the government of Mexico here.
DOBBS: John, that is a -- wait a minute. Excuse me, John. Because I, at some point, will get unamused with rhetoric.
And the point is, we did invite the government of Mexico here. The ambassador, any representative of the Fox government, whatsoever. Would you like to know who the government of Mexico decided they could accept?
Would you like to know?
TRASVINA: No, I don't know.
DOBBS: A public relations official.
TRASVINA: I'm not interested in the government of Mexico.
DOBBS: You're not?
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: What's your point, please? I've listened to...
TRASVINA: The U.S. and Mexico ought to be doing it together. You don't put up a wall and say let's discuss it.
DOBBS: Are you suggesting that the government of Mexico has no responsibility for half its people being in poverty, for 20 million people, as many as 20 million people into this country?
TRASVINA: Of course the government of Mexico has a responsibility.
All nations have a responsibility.
DOBBS: Thank you.
Do we have a responsibility to secure our borders and to stop a problem that is creating victims all over this country?
TRASVINA: We have a responsibility for a system of immigration.
DOBBS: And do you have a responsibility...
TRASVINA: It's not just the border that's broken. The immigration system's broken. Families are split up...
DOBBS: And do you have a responsibility to remove race from this dialogue, because both you and Rosa have said it. It's absurd.
TRASVINA: This dialogue permeates in race, it has in our nation's history, it has on your show...
DOBBS: Yes, John, and you know what else? It is the last refuge of people without arguments. It is the last refuge of people without fact.
TRASVINA: Why don't you do the show in Buffalo?
DOBBS: I will be glad to, but in Buffalo the greater issue is a middle class that's been destroyed by absurd federal free trade policies, by corporate practices that take no regard whatsoever of American citizens who are entitled to an opportunity for a job.
TRASVINA: And our free trade policies...
DOBBS: Thank you, that's your answer to that.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Dan Stein, your turn.
ROSALES: The middle class is being destroyed?
DOBBS: Please.
ROSALES: Where's your documentation?
DOBBS: I thought we didn't need documentation, Rosa.
Oh, wait a minute. Whoa!
ROSALES: What documentation are you presenting...
DOBBS: Now you want documentation?
Rosa! Please!
I'm hurt. My feelings are hurt -- Dan.
DAN STEIN, PRESIDENT, FAIR: There's no question this is an emotional debate, and for our democratic system, where the people are supposed to rule, it is posing a challenge for the American people to get their will through the system. We have large corporations, major corporations.
They underwrite groups like MALDEF that want to protect the supply of cheap labor, regardless of how it destroys hospitals, public old education, quality of life, small town America.
As Speaker Hastert says, every city is a border city now. Something is going get done. But you know when the first time employer sanctions were introduced in Congress, Lou? 1949. 1949 by Peter Rodino. Why won't the government enforce the laws that the American people have enacted? And...
DOBBS: And I'm asking the question of why will no one on this panel answer the question I asked?
STEIN: Mexico has a responsibility. I got into this issue 25 years ago, and I couldn't see how promoting illegal immigration helped the sending countries or the receiving countries. Twenty-five years later it is clear that Mexico's position is designed to perpetrate a corrupt government and a corrupt political system.
DOBBS: Roy Back (ph), you've been a wonderful observer of this. We're going to take a quick break. We're going to come right back and we're going to be talking with Roy. We're going to give him a chance.
And I'm remind everybody the question. What is the role of the Mexican government in this?
Can we do that? Pretty please?
ROSALES: We're not being invaded, you know? What's all this hysteria?
Is it because the Latino population is growing in such great numbers that we fear the voting power?
DOBBS: Oh, Rosa.
ROSALES: That we fear the...
(APPLAUSE)
DOBBS: All right. Rosa, I was so proud of you. Rosa, I was so proud of you, and then you bring up race.
Rosa, as of now I have no interest...
ROSALES: What did President Reagan tell Gorbachev. What did he say?
DOBBS: Rosa.
ROSALES: Tear down that wall!
And now we want to build walls.
DOBBS: Rosa, what is the responsibility of the Mexican government here? That was the question.
ROSALES: I think there is a responsibility, Mexico and the United States need to work together to get meaningful immigration reform for this country. You're right.
DOBBS: Aren't you afraid -- aren't you afraid that the government of Mexico will consider you somewhat patronizing and condescending, perhaps even racist, to suggest that Mexico cannot take responsibility for its own problems?
ROSALES: I don't think so. I don't think so. And as a matter of fact, I'm going meet with President Calderon, OK?
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: You have a hoot.
I'm going want to turn to you, John. What is your answer to the question?
JOHN TRASVINA, INTERIM PRESIDENT, MALDEF: Lou, if you had wanted the perspective of the government of Mexico, you should have brought the government of Mexico here. Soles Americanos (ph). We're Americans, just the same as everyone else on this panel.
DOBBS: I'm sorry, you're what? Say that again?
TRASVINA: We're Americans, the same as everyone else.
DOBBS: Is that in dispute?
TRASVINA: It is when you're asking us about what the government of Mexico -- you should have brought the government of Mexico here.
DOBBS: John, that is a -- wait a minute. Excuse me, John. Because I, at some point, will get unamused with rhetoric.
And the point is, we did invite the government of Mexico here. The ambassador, any representative of the Fox government, whatsoever. Would you like to know who the government of Mexico decided they could accept?
Would you like to know?
TRASVINA: No, I don't know.
DOBBS: A public relations official.
TRASVINA: I'm not interested in the government of Mexico.
DOBBS: You're not?
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: What's your point, please? I've listened to...
TRASVINA: The U.S. and Mexico ought to be doing it together. You don't put up a wall and say let's discuss it.
DOBBS: Are you suggesting that the government of Mexico has no responsibility for half its people being in poverty, for 20 million people, as many as 20 million people into this country?
TRASVINA: Of course the government of Mexico has a responsibility.
All nations have a responsibility.
DOBBS: Thank you.
Do we have a responsibility to secure our borders and to stop a problem that is creating victims all over this country?
TRASVINA: We have a responsibility for a system of immigration.
DOBBS: And do you have a responsibility...
TRASVINA: It's not just the border that's broken. The immigration system's broken. Families are split up...
DOBBS: And do you have a responsibility to remove race from this dialogue, because both you and Rosa have said it. It's absurd.
TRASVINA: This dialogue permeates in race, it has in our nation's history, it has on your show...
DOBBS: Yes, John, and you know what else? It is the last refuge of people without arguments. It is the last refuge of people without fact.
TRASVINA: Why don't you do the show in Buffalo?
DOBBS: I will be glad to, but in Buffalo the greater issue is a middle class that's been destroyed by absurd federal free trade policies, by corporate practices that take no regard whatsoever of American citizens who are entitled to an opportunity for a job.
TRASVINA: And our free trade policies...
DOBBS: Thank you, that's your answer to that.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Dan Stein, your turn.
ROSALES: The middle class is being destroyed?
DOBBS: Please.
ROSALES: Where's your documentation?
DOBBS: I thought we didn't need documentation, Rosa.
Oh, wait a minute. Whoa!
ROSALES: What documentation are you presenting...
DOBBS: Now you want documentation?
Rosa! Please!
I'm hurt. My feelings are hurt -- Dan.
DAN STEIN, PRESIDENT, FAIR: There's no question this is an emotional debate, and for our democratic system, where the people are supposed to rule, it is posing a challenge for the American people to get their will through the system. We have large corporations, major corporations.
They underwrite groups like MALDEF that want to protect the supply of cheap labor, regardless of how it destroys hospitals, public old education, quality of life, small town America.
As Speaker Hastert says, every city is a border city now. Something is going get done. But you know when the first time employer sanctions were introduced in Congress, Lou? 1949. 1949 by Peter Rodino. Why won't the government enforce the laws that the American people have enacted? And...
DOBBS: And I'm asking the question of why will no one on this panel answer the question I asked?
STEIN: Mexico has a responsibility. I got into this issue 25 years ago, and I couldn't see how promoting illegal immigration helped the sending countries or the receiving countries. Twenty-five years later it is clear that Mexico's position is designed to perpetrate a corrupt government and a corrupt political system.
DOBBS: Roy Back (ph), you've been a wonderful observer of this. We're going to take a quick break. We're going to come right back and we're going to be talking with Roy. We're going to give him a chance.
And I'm remind everybody the question. What is the role of the Mexican government in this?
Can we do that? Pretty please?
# posted by ATN @ 12:37 AM
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
CNN Signs Up Mid-Term Election Sponsors
Source: Broadcasting and Cable CNN Ad Sales says it has lined up three major sponsors for its coverage of the midterm elections.
Norfolk Southern, the American Association of Retired Persons and the Partnership for Prescription Assistance have signed up for what are described as comprehensive, "cross-network" ad packages.
The three will get on-air billboards and tune-in spots for coverage across all networks, which includes prime time specials, an expanded Situation Room with Paula Zahn joining Wolf Blitzer; CNN.com stories, wireless polls, podcasts, and more. AARP will be the exclusive sponsor of the expanded Situation Room and several online elements.
In addition, they will get spots in the videos running on “Election Express Yourself – Independent Thinker Tour” Airstream, a 34-foot mobile "interactive experience" traveling the country to let viewers weigh in on the elections.
Norfolk Southern, the American Association of Retired Persons and the Partnership for Prescription Assistance have signed up for what are described as comprehensive, "cross-network" ad packages.
The three will get on-air billboards and tune-in spots for coverage across all networks, which includes prime time specials, an expanded Situation Room with Paula Zahn joining Wolf Blitzer; CNN.com stories, wireless polls, podcasts, and more. AARP will be the exclusive sponsor of the expanded Situation Room and several online elements.
In addition, they will get spots in the videos running on “Election Express Yourself – Independent Thinker Tour” Airstream, a 34-foot mobile "interactive experience" traveling the country to let viewers weigh in on the elections.
# posted by ATN @ 2:20 PM
CNN International to Cover US Mid-term Elections
Source: Indian Television With less than a month before the US mid-term elections are held CNN International rolls out America Votes 2006 across its global television, internet, broadband and wireless services.The channel notes that the stakes could not be higher with US Republicans battling to keep both houses of Congress and Democrats hoping public discontent with the War in Iraq will give them an advantage. CNN’s team of political correspondents will bring coverage to more than 198 million television households, millions of internet users via CNN.com and via broadband on CNN Pipeline. Additionally, CNN’s coverage will be available on wireless services around the world.
CNN International VP Rena Golden says, “No other broadcaster can bring a global audience the depth of coverage, the analytical background or quick breaking news like CNN International. Our audiences, whether on television, the internet or wireless, deserve the very best and our award-winning team provides it.”
The channel's coverage culminates on 8 November with live Election Night with programming from New York featuring Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Paula Zahn and Lou Dobbs who will all provide wall-to-wall news and analysis in CNN’s new state-of-the-art studios at the Time Warner Center.
CNN correspondents and affiliates from around the world will also offer up-to-the-minute reports and analysis on how the election results impact the world. Leading up to the election and on Election Night, coverage from the U.S. will be led by senior political correspondent Candy Crowley; chief national correspondent John King; senior national correspondent John Roberts; senior political analysts Bill Schneider and Jeff Greenfield; congressional correspondents Dana Bash and Andrea Koppel; White House correspondents Ed Henry, Suzanne Malveaux and Elaine Quijano.
As the campaign moves into its final stages, CNN International will air a series called Broken Government. These programmes will be featured on Inisght with Jonathan Mann.
· To Do Nothing Congress - CNN White House correspondent Eds Henry – a veteran of a decade covering Capitol Hill – portrays the paralysis brought on by partisanship and obsession over raising money for elections. It airs on 31 October 2006 at 9:30 am and 3:30 pm.
· Power Play - Chief national correspondent John King returns to his former beat, the White House, to report on the Bush administration’s controversial efforts to wrest back executive authority stripped away by Congress in the years following Vietnam and Watergate. This airs on 1 November at 9:30 am and 3:30 pm and on 4 November at 8:30 pm.
· Two Left Feet - Senior political correspondent Candy Crowley will examine why Democratic candidates seem to have such a hard time getting elected and are often out-manoeuvred by Republican opponents who appear to be better organized and faster on their feet. It airs on 4 November at 12:30 pm.
· Where the Right Went Wrong - Senior political analyst Jeff Greenfield looks at those most deeply committed to the conservative cause and their enragement over out-of-control government spending, political pork, nation-building and the president’s more lenient approach to immigration. This airs on 3 November at 9:30 am and 3:30 pm and on 5 November at 12: 30 pm.
In addition extended versions of Your World Today will provide in-depth analysis on the day’s leading political stories in the week leading up to Election Night. Real-time results will be available on CNN.com and on CNN Pipeline, the site's live broadband video news service. Additionally, CNN.com's special election section can be found at www.CNN.com/elections and provides a complete look at the political arena, featuring on-going political news coverage with multimedia packages, galleries, interactive maps, user feedback, expert analysis, quizzes, streamed video and podcasts.
# posted by ATN @ 12:02 PM
‘Warrior One’ Visits Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio
Source: CNN Press Release CNN’s Warrior One, an Iraq War Hummer refurbished by the crew of TLC’s Overhaulin’ program, will be on display on Thursday, Oct. 26, at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio . The visit at the 450-bed Army hospital marks the Hummer’s third stop on a tour of military bases and other sites across the country.CNN producers, video journalists and correspondents used the vehicle when they were embedded with the First Battalion, 7th Marines in the war in Iraq in 2003. The vehicle came under heavy fire near Baghdad in April 2003.
This summer, Overhaulin’ took the Hummer to the show’s workshop in Irvine, Calif. Crews overhauled the Hummer’s engine and body and installed an extensive entertainment system that includes a DVD player, four LCD monitors and a state-of-the-art sound system. Airbrush artists painted images of journalists and military men and women onto the vehicle as a tribute to those who served during the war in Iraq or covered the war.
After Warrior One’s tour of military bases and other sites across the country, the Barrett-Jackson Auction Co., a premiere classic car auction house, will auction the vehicle on Jan. 20, 2007, at the auction company’s headquarters in Scottsdale , Ariz. Proceeds will go to the Fisher House Foundation (www.fisherhouse.org), an organization that builds “comfort homes” for families of hospitalized military personnel.
The Overhaulin’ episode featuring Warrior One is scheduled for 9 p.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 14, on TLC.
# posted by ATN @ 11:48 AM
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
CNN WILL NOT Promote Bush Assassination Movie; FNC to Run Ads on Website
Source: Reuters Major U.S. news outlets CNN and National Public Radio will not air paid ads or sponsor announcements for a controversial movie depicting the assassination of President George W. Bush, citing the film's content, network spokeswomen said on Tuesday.
The movie, "Death of a President," caused a stir at the Toronto Film Festival in September where it debuted, and two major U.S. theater chains have declined to screen the movie when it debuts in the United States on Friday.
"CNN has decided not to take the ad because of the extreme nature of the movie's subject matter," the cable television network said in a statement.
A spokeswoman declined to comment beyond the statement. The network has reported about the movie in recent months.
AND it's reported FNC's website will run ads promoting the film.
The movie, "Death of a President," caused a stir at the Toronto Film Festival in September where it debuted, and two major U.S. theater chains have declined to screen the movie when it debuts in the United States on Friday.
"CNN has decided not to take the ad because of the extreme nature of the movie's subject matter," the cable television network said in a statement.
A spokeswoman declined to comment beyond the statement. The network has reported about the movie in recent months.
AND it's reported FNC's website will run ads promoting the film.
# posted by ATN @ 11:40 PM
Lou Dobbs to Host ‘Broken Borders’ Town Hall on Oct. 25 in San Antonio
Source: CNN Press Release CNN anchor and best-selling author Lou Dobbs will host a town hall meeting titled “Lou Dobbs Tonight America Votes 2006: Broken Borders” on Wednesday, Oct. 25, from the Empire Theater in San Antonio . With unmatched expertise on the subject of illegal immigration and border security, Dobbs will lead a discussion with panelists including Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.); Rosa Rosales, national president of the League of United Latin American Citizens; and John Trasviña, interim president and general counsel, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
The event will air live on CNN/U.S. at 7 p.m. (ET) and re-air at 11p.m. (ET). Originating from the Empire Theatre, 226 N. St. Mary’s St. , this forum is the second in a series of three special broadcasts Dobbs will host leading up to Election Night.
Dobbs will examine, from all sides, the impact of illegal immigration on the nation’s health care system, public education and wages among other critical issues. For example, the town hall will provide a forum to debate the role of corporations in the exploitation of cheap labor as well as the need for a border fence in a post 9-11 world. With audience member participation, the discussion will also address important questions such as: Should the nation have tighter border security? Is amnesty the right solution for the 20 million illegal aliens living in the United States ? Are illegal immigrants causing a disruption and a drain to the national public services?
Viewers can participate in the town hall meeting by visiting www.CNN.com/loutownhall, where they can offer feedback and ask questions. The town hall will re-air the next day on CNN Pipeline, CNN.com’s on-demand broadband news video service.
Three of CNN’s specialty vehicles – the CNN Election Express, the CNN Election Express Yourself and the CNN Iraq War Hummer “Warrior One” – will be on display in San Antonio on Wednesday, Oct. 25, in conjunction with Dobb’s “Broken Borders” town hall meeting.
The CNN Election Express bus will be parked outside the theater for the event. Both the CNN Election Express Yourself Airstream and Warrior One will be parked at the Rivercenter Mall at the corner of Bowie and Crockett Street , a few blocks from the Alamo from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. (CT)
The event will air live on CNN/U.S. at 7 p.m. (ET) and re-air at 11p.m. (ET). Originating from the Empire Theatre, 226 N. St. Mary’s St. , this forum is the second in a series of three special broadcasts Dobbs will host leading up to Election Night.
Dobbs will examine, from all sides, the impact of illegal immigration on the nation’s health care system, public education and wages among other critical issues. For example, the town hall will provide a forum to debate the role of corporations in the exploitation of cheap labor as well as the need for a border fence in a post 9-11 world. With audience member participation, the discussion will also address important questions such as: Should the nation have tighter border security? Is amnesty the right solution for the 20 million illegal aliens living in the United States ? Are illegal immigrants causing a disruption and a drain to the national public services?
Viewers can participate in the town hall meeting by visiting www.CNN.com/loutownhall, where they can offer feedback and ask questions. The town hall will re-air the next day on CNN Pipeline, CNN.com’s on-demand broadband news video service.
Three of CNN’s specialty vehicles – the CNN Election Express, the CNN Election Express Yourself and the CNN Iraq War Hummer “Warrior One” – will be on display in San Antonio on Wednesday, Oct. 25, in conjunction with Dobb’s “Broken Borders” town hall meeting.
The CNN Election Express bus will be parked outside the theater for the event. Both the CNN Election Express Yourself Airstream and Warrior One will be parked at the Rivercenter Mall at the corner of Bowie and Crockett Street , a few blocks from the Alamo from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. (CT)
# posted by ATN @ 12:23 PM
Former CNN'er on Taking the Money and Running
Former CNN Anchor Bobby Battista is featured today in The New Times commenting about her contract buyout several years ago when CNN was bought out by AOL:"Bobbie Battista also believed in the company where she enjoyed her professional success, but when the corporate culture changed, she used her severance offer to create her own culture. Ms. Battista, 54, was one of the original anchors on CNN Headline News when the company started in 1981, and expected to remain at CNN until she reached 55 or 60. But after the network merged with America Online, she was offered a voluntary buyout package in 2001 of 23 months’ salary and benefits, one month for each year with the company.
“For me it was a no-brainer,” she said. She did not share the goals of her new managers, and felt the offer would not be available for too long. At 50, with an offer to renew her contract for three years, she decided to take the buyout and start her own public-relations company with her husband and other former CNN colleagues. “What surprised me is how easily they let me walk out the door,” she said. “But it’s a new era at CNN. Anybody who was part of the old era was dispensable.”
Ms. Battista said she had long been interested in starting her own company, but expected it to come later. Now she advises companies that CNN used to cover about how to navigate the media landscape.
Since starting the business, Atamira Communications, in early 2002 in Atlanta, the toughest part of the transition has been the change of pace, she said. “In the newsroom, it can be like a crisis 24/7. It was a bit of a transition moving into an office. It’s quieter. I had to put a TV in the office.”
After four and a half years, she said, she is making about half her salary at CNN, which was “well into the six figures but not near a million.” But she expects to surpass her old income someday.
After the start-up days at CNN, she is not daunted by the risks of starting again on her own.
“When I went to work for Ted Turner, I had no idea what I was getting into,” she said. “I’ve always been O.K. going off the deep end, venturing into territory that is not familiar and making it work.”
The television in her office, she added, is tuned to CNN. Some affinities die hard."
# posted by ATN @ 12:13 PM
Galanos a Keeper at HLN
This from TV Spy : "Mike Galanos re-signs as an Anchor/Correspondent for CNN Headline News based in Atlanta."# posted by ATN @ 12:03 PM
Monday, October 23, 2006
Angry Republican Rep Hunter Appears on The Situation Room
On today's edition of CNN's "The Situation Room," Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA) and retired U.S. Army Brigadier General David Grange spoke about CNN’s decision to air an insurgent video:
Wolf Blitzer: And joining us now from Manchester, New Hampshire, California Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter.
He's the chairman of the House Armed Services.
And from Minneapolis, our CNN military analyst, retired U.S. Army Brigadier General David Grange.
Thanks to both of you for coming in.
I know on Friday, Mr. Chairman, when you announced your clear concern about this report on CNN, this insurgent video that was shown, you said you hadn't actually seen it.
Have you seen the full five minute report by now?
HUNTER: I've seen the shooting of the American serviceman -- I haven't, but I've seen -- I've seen the text of your analysis and of the CNN reasoning that went -- that went behind your decision to show it.
BLITZER: Because, you know, we never actually showed a U.S. military officer or serviceman being killed. We went to black before anyone was shot.
HUNTER: Well, the one that I saw appears that it goes right up to the point where he's shot and it looks like you see them going down. It's a fairly -- it's a somewhat blurry film, but it does appear to me to show an impact, Wolf.
So maybe we need to stop it and show it in slow frames.
But I think there's a -- I think the danger of this is several fold.
One, this is propaganda by the bad guys. It has almost no value in terms of the overall strategy of the war. It simply shows somebody being shot. Everybody who is killed in Iraq, every one of the 271 -- or 2,791 -- soldiers who has died is listed the next day in thousands of newspapers and media across the nation. So this isn't -- this isn't a case of people not knowing that soldiers are being shot.
But the idea that in the invasion of Normandy, if Hitler sent us a film, sent CNN a film showing Americans going down under .50 caliber bullets on the -- on the beaches of Normandy or in Iowa Jima, the Imperial Government of Japan sending CNN images of American Marines -- 5,000 of them were killed at Iowa Jima -- going down under the impact of rounds as they hit that beach, or went out on Mount Suribachi would have been outrageous.
BLITZER: All right. All right.
Let -- let me bring in retired U.S. Army General David Grange, our military analyst.
General Grange, you speak with some authority on this. You are not only a retired general. You're a former U.S. Army Ranger, a Green Beret, a member of the elite Delta Force.
You were involved. You helped us better appreciate this insurgent video that was given to our Michael Ware in Baghdad. And you had some initial concerns. Talk a little bit about your -- your involvement in this decision.
RETIRED BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, my involvement was, I was asked to review the -- the full tape to see if it was authentic, to see if it was, in fact, a -- just it was set up to be props, in other words, it wasn't actual combat footage.
I also looked at it in my own accord to look at the capabilities that their snipers were using, because what's key in this is that our forces find out how they are doing things, because the tape was not given to our military, and we can counter that.
Now, I know for a fact that I -- I gave my comments. They asked if I would be involved in talking about it. I said I would not, unless certain conditions were met. One, they did not show an American soldier going down. They did far pictures. They did blackout. And they said up front, which I -- I believe Anderson Cooper did say, that this was, in fact, a propaganda film, and that I would talk about this as typical, just like of beheadings, of how our enemies use propaganda information warfare to influence public opinion, both overseas and in the United States.
So, I -- I do know that they went through a very difficult decision on this. I'm not saying it was right or wrong. I think what came out of it, knowing that something was going to be shown, that they -- they did it the best they could, because it's a very gruesome film, if you look at the whole thing.
BLITZER: Did -- did the conditions that you put forward, did CNN meet those conditions?
GRANGE: Things I asked for, yes, they did.
What's another interesting piece, in "USA" newspaper, "USA Today," they talked about capturing a sniper team in Baghdad that used a vehicle with a hole cut out of it with a video camera in the back of the car, which is the same thing we said was happening last week on the technique used in these particular sniper cuts. I think there were 10 incidents altogether.
BLITZER: Is -- is this appropriate, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Hunter, for the American public to see how awful, to see how brutal the war can actually be?
Because I -- I guess there has been criticism from the other side that we sort of whitewash, and we don't really convey to the American public the full extent of the brutality of the enemy. Do the American people have a right to know what war is like?
HUNTER: Well -- well, first, Wolf, the American people aren't made out of cotton candy. They understand, when you see 2,791 battlefield deaths, that people are killed, and they are killed in bad ways.
This is the first generation of Americans that could actually go online and watch an American be decapitated, have his head cut off by al-Zarqawi, as they watch. So, I would say that, contrary to what you are saying, this is a war in which more brutality is shown than probably any other.
But the point is that -- that this one killing of one American doesn't really tell any statistic. Of -- of the people killed in Iraq, 524 of our Americans have been killed in accidents, mainly automobile accidents. Now, you don't show automobile accidents, because it's not sexy. It's not violent. It doesn't draw a big audience. Showing the impact of a single bullet, a single shooting doesn't tell you anything. If you isolated one American going down on Omaha Beach at Normandy, what would that tell the American public?
BLITZER: Well, let me interrupt...
HUNTER: But how...
BLITZER: ... Mr. Chairman.
HUNTER: But -- but I guess my question to you is -- is, Wolf, how instructive would that be with respect to the conduct of the war? It tells you nothing, except an American was struck by a bullet and went down.
BLITZER: But we never actually showed the impact. And you can take a look at that five-minute report. And you will see that we never saw -- we went to black before that insurgent video, that propaganda video, which we ourselves called it a propaganda piece of footage...
HUNTER: Then -- then, what's the value, Wolf? What's the possible value, then?
BLITZER: The value -- some of -- some of the thinking -- and let me bring in General Grange on this.
When the Pentagon announces killed in action, they -- they don't refer to snipers specifically. They refer to small-arms fire. And there have been hundreds of American troops who have been killed in small-arms fire. And -- and one of the things that we saw in this video -- and, General Grange, let me let you elaborate -- is the nature of the enemy, how they stalk and try to kill American troops with these kinds of snipers.
But, go ahead, General, and -- and talk a little bit about that.
GRANGE: No, I mean, you can argue whether the tape should be shown or not.
I mean, I just looked back. Since 9/11, I mean, a different -- when you are asked to do a -- to make comment on a different segment, quite often, it's a decision you have to make, at least in my case, as a retired G.I., and working with the media periodically, that I always have a tough decision whether I should even comment or not.
In this case, this thing is shown overseas. And I knew it would be shown in some extent. Thank God that we show it in a -- in a better way than it is showed in its raw footage.
But point is that I guess I cheated a little bit, because we kind of -- my comments were kind of to turn it around and show the -- and capabilities of the enemy in this regard, and -- and how they use civilians for cover, and abuse civilian neighborhoods, and -- and just the way they operate, which is against the land -- rule of land warfare, to expose those things.
So, you know, in a difficult situation like this, showing it or not, I think it's also an opportunity to exploit these guys, and give the information to our people, so we can survive and take them down.
HUNTER: General, I look at it just the opposite.
I think showing Americans being killed by terrorists, with -- apparently, with impunity, because the film doesn't show the terrorists then being pursued and killed. And lots of terrorists who have shot at Americans took their last shot at the Americans, because they themselves were killed in turn.
But showing the world a film, and lots of terrorists out there watching their TV sets, a picture of an American being killed in a crowd by a terrorist who operates, apparently, with impunity, and gets away, is highly suggestive, I think, and highly instructive to them.
And I think it's dangerous to Americans, not only uniformed Americans, but also tourists, Americans who might go abroad and be in one of those crowds one day, when somebody who saw that film, how you just walk up and kill them while they are in a crowd, decides to replicate that action.
BLITZER: All right.
HUNTER: Well, sir, if I may, it's a point well taken. And -- and I recognize that.
And -- and I would say that, in the comments that were said in this, that, in my evaluation, they were not all -- they did not kill a lot of the Americans in this shot. They missed. There were some wounds. And, in fact, the -- they were not that good, and which would have been a different slant, the way it was shown internationally, compared to how it was shown by -- in the United States.
BLITZER: We're almost out of time, Mr. Chairman, but let me just wrap it up.
In your -- your letter, you suggest that CNN reporters no longer be allowed to be embedded with U.S. military forces in Iraq. We have several of our reporters all the time embedded, literally risking their lives, very courageous reporters, whether Michael Ware. John Roberts is embedded with the U.S. Army in Iraq right now. And -- and we have -- we have -- we have been doing that for three-and-a-half years.
Are you at least open to this notion that good people, like you and General Grange, can disagree on this, without questioning the -- the credibility, the patriotism of CNN?
HUNTER: I think that -- I think the question I asked when I saw this, Wolf, is, does CNN want America to win this thing?
And, if I was a platoon leader there, as I once was, and I had a -- and I had a news organization which had shown, had -- had taken film from the enemy, showing them killing one of my soldiers, and they asked if they could be embedded in my platoon, my answer would be no.
I go back to the -- to the -- the days of guys like Joe Rosenthal, who filmed the raising of the flag at Iwo Jima, and Ernie Pyle, who was a soldier's reporter, the guys who were on our side -- even though they reported the rough and the tough of the war, they were on our side.
You can't be on both sides. And I would say, if I was that platoon leader, I would say, absolutely not. Take CNN out of there. You can't be on both sides.
BLITZER: I will -- I will give you a -- just a quick second to wrap it up, General Grange.
GRANGE: Well, as a platoon leader in Vietnam, I would have said the same thing. I agree with you on that -- or even in Iraq today.
My -- my concern is the power of information warfare, and how they use it. And I -- and I look at opportunities that we can turn around on the enemy, because they are winning the information warfare front. You can argue that our -- our -- the media in the United States supports that somewhat.
I don't know if it's -- talking to people I talked to, that was not the intent. But it is a very dicey situation. I understand that. And -- and, hopefully, it is -- it's going to all get sorted out, and they will get the people that did this. I know they got some today.
BLITZER: All right. We will continue to watch this story.
Duncan Hunter is the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.
Mr. Chairman, thanks very much...
HUNTER: Sure.
BLITZER: ... for coming in.
Wolf Blitzer: And joining us now from Manchester, New Hampshire, California Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter.
He's the chairman of the House Armed Services.
And from Minneapolis, our CNN military analyst, retired U.S. Army Brigadier General David Grange.
Thanks to both of you for coming in.
I know on Friday, Mr. Chairman, when you announced your clear concern about this report on CNN, this insurgent video that was shown, you said you hadn't actually seen it.
Have you seen the full five minute report by now?
HUNTER: I've seen the shooting of the American serviceman -- I haven't, but I've seen -- I've seen the text of your analysis and of the CNN reasoning that went -- that went behind your decision to show it.
BLITZER: Because, you know, we never actually showed a U.S. military officer or serviceman being killed. We went to black before anyone was shot.
HUNTER: Well, the one that I saw appears that it goes right up to the point where he's shot and it looks like you see them going down. It's a fairly -- it's a somewhat blurry film, but it does appear to me to show an impact, Wolf.
So maybe we need to stop it and show it in slow frames.
But I think there's a -- I think the danger of this is several fold.
One, this is propaganda by the bad guys. It has almost no value in terms of the overall strategy of the war. It simply shows somebody being shot. Everybody who is killed in Iraq, every one of the 271 -- or 2,791 -- soldiers who has died is listed the next day in thousands of newspapers and media across the nation. So this isn't -- this isn't a case of people not knowing that soldiers are being shot.
But the idea that in the invasion of Normandy, if Hitler sent us a film, sent CNN a film showing Americans going down under .50 caliber bullets on the -- on the beaches of Normandy or in Iowa Jima, the Imperial Government of Japan sending CNN images of American Marines -- 5,000 of them were killed at Iowa Jima -- going down under the impact of rounds as they hit that beach, or went out on Mount Suribachi would have been outrageous.
BLITZER: All right. All right.
Let -- let me bring in retired U.S. Army General David Grange, our military analyst.
General Grange, you speak with some authority on this. You are not only a retired general. You're a former U.S. Army Ranger, a Green Beret, a member of the elite Delta Force.
You were involved. You helped us better appreciate this insurgent video that was given to our Michael Ware in Baghdad. And you had some initial concerns. Talk a little bit about your -- your involvement in this decision.
RETIRED BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, my involvement was, I was asked to review the -- the full tape to see if it was authentic, to see if it was, in fact, a -- just it was set up to be props, in other words, it wasn't actual combat footage.
I also looked at it in my own accord to look at the capabilities that their snipers were using, because what's key in this is that our forces find out how they are doing things, because the tape was not given to our military, and we can counter that.
Now, I know for a fact that I -- I gave my comments. They asked if I would be involved in talking about it. I said I would not, unless certain conditions were met. One, they did not show an American soldier going down. They did far pictures. They did blackout. And they said up front, which I -- I believe Anderson Cooper did say, that this was, in fact, a propaganda film, and that I would talk about this as typical, just like of beheadings, of how our enemies use propaganda information warfare to influence public opinion, both overseas and in the United States.
So, I -- I do know that they went through a very difficult decision on this. I'm not saying it was right or wrong. I think what came out of it, knowing that something was going to be shown, that they -- they did it the best they could, because it's a very gruesome film, if you look at the whole thing.
BLITZER: Did -- did the conditions that you put forward, did CNN meet those conditions?
GRANGE: Things I asked for, yes, they did.
What's another interesting piece, in "USA" newspaper, "USA Today," they talked about capturing a sniper team in Baghdad that used a vehicle with a hole cut out of it with a video camera in the back of the car, which is the same thing we said was happening last week on the technique used in these particular sniper cuts. I think there were 10 incidents altogether.
BLITZER: Is -- is this appropriate, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Hunter, for the American public to see how awful, to see how brutal the war can actually be?
Because I -- I guess there has been criticism from the other side that we sort of whitewash, and we don't really convey to the American public the full extent of the brutality of the enemy. Do the American people have a right to know what war is like?
HUNTER: Well -- well, first, Wolf, the American people aren't made out of cotton candy. They understand, when you see 2,791 battlefield deaths, that people are killed, and they are killed in bad ways.
This is the first generation of Americans that could actually go online and watch an American be decapitated, have his head cut off by al-Zarqawi, as they watch. So, I would say that, contrary to what you are saying, this is a war in which more brutality is shown than probably any other.
But the point is that -- that this one killing of one American doesn't really tell any statistic. Of -- of the people killed in Iraq, 524 of our Americans have been killed in accidents, mainly automobile accidents. Now, you don't show automobile accidents, because it's not sexy. It's not violent. It doesn't draw a big audience. Showing the impact of a single bullet, a single shooting doesn't tell you anything. If you isolated one American going down on Omaha Beach at Normandy, what would that tell the American public?
BLITZER: Well, let me interrupt...
HUNTER: But how...
BLITZER: ... Mr. Chairman.
HUNTER: But -- but I guess my question to you is -- is, Wolf, how instructive would that be with respect to the conduct of the war? It tells you nothing, except an American was struck by a bullet and went down.
BLITZER: But we never actually showed the impact. And you can take a look at that five-minute report. And you will see that we never saw -- we went to black before that insurgent video, that propaganda video, which we ourselves called it a propaganda piece of footage...
HUNTER: Then -- then, what's the value, Wolf? What's the possible value, then?
BLITZER: The value -- some of -- some of the thinking -- and let me bring in General Grange on this.
When the Pentagon announces killed in action, they -- they don't refer to snipers specifically. They refer to small-arms fire. And there have been hundreds of American troops who have been killed in small-arms fire. And -- and one of the things that we saw in this video -- and, General Grange, let me let you elaborate -- is the nature of the enemy, how they stalk and try to kill American troops with these kinds of snipers.
But, go ahead, General, and -- and talk a little bit about that.
GRANGE: No, I mean, you can argue whether the tape should be shown or not.
I mean, I just looked back. Since 9/11, I mean, a different -- when you are asked to do a -- to make comment on a different segment, quite often, it's a decision you have to make, at least in my case, as a retired G.I., and working with the media periodically, that I always have a tough decision whether I should even comment or not.
In this case, this thing is shown overseas. And I knew it would be shown in some extent. Thank God that we show it in a -- in a better way than it is showed in its raw footage.
But point is that I guess I cheated a little bit, because we kind of -- my comments were kind of to turn it around and show the -- and capabilities of the enemy in this regard, and -- and how they use civilians for cover, and abuse civilian neighborhoods, and -- and just the way they operate, which is against the land -- rule of land warfare, to expose those things.
So, you know, in a difficult situation like this, showing it or not, I think it's also an opportunity to exploit these guys, and give the information to our people, so we can survive and take them down.
HUNTER: General, I look at it just the opposite.
I think showing Americans being killed by terrorists, with -- apparently, with impunity, because the film doesn't show the terrorists then being pursued and killed. And lots of terrorists who have shot at Americans took their last shot at the Americans, because they themselves were killed in turn.
But showing the world a film, and lots of terrorists out there watching their TV sets, a picture of an American being killed in a crowd by a terrorist who operates, apparently, with impunity, and gets away, is highly suggestive, I think, and highly instructive to them.
And I think it's dangerous to Americans, not only uniformed Americans, but also tourists, Americans who might go abroad and be in one of those crowds one day, when somebody who saw that film, how you just walk up and kill them while they are in a crowd, decides to replicate that action.
BLITZER: All right.
HUNTER: Well, sir, if I may, it's a point well taken. And -- and I recognize that.
And -- and I would say that, in the comments that were said in this, that, in my evaluation, they were not all -- they did not kill a lot of the Americans in this shot. They missed. There were some wounds. And, in fact, the -- they were not that good, and which would have been a different slant, the way it was shown internationally, compared to how it was shown by -- in the United States.
BLITZER: We're almost out of time, Mr. Chairman, but let me just wrap it up.
In your -- your letter, you suggest that CNN reporters no longer be allowed to be embedded with U.S. military forces in Iraq. We have several of our reporters all the time embedded, literally risking their lives, very courageous reporters, whether Michael Ware. John Roberts is embedded with the U.S. Army in Iraq right now. And -- and we have -- we have -- we have been doing that for three-and-a-half years.
Are you at least open to this notion that good people, like you and General Grange, can disagree on this, without questioning the -- the credibility, the patriotism of CNN?
HUNTER: I think that -- I think the question I asked when I saw this, Wolf, is, does CNN want America to win this thing?
And, if I was a platoon leader there, as I once was, and I had a -- and I had a news organization which had shown, had -- had taken film from the enemy, showing them killing one of my soldiers, and they asked if they could be embedded in my platoon, my answer would be no.
I go back to the -- to the -- the days of guys like Joe Rosenthal, who filmed the raising of the flag at Iwo Jima, and Ernie Pyle, who was a soldier's reporter, the guys who were on our side -- even though they reported the rough and the tough of the war, they were on our side.
You can't be on both sides. And I would say, if I was that platoon leader, I would say, absolutely not. Take CNN out of there. You can't be on both sides.
BLITZER: I will -- I will give you a -- just a quick second to wrap it up, General Grange.
GRANGE: Well, as a platoon leader in Vietnam, I would have said the same thing. I agree with you on that -- or even in Iraq today.
My -- my concern is the power of information warfare, and how they use it. And I -- and I look at opportunities that we can turn around on the enemy, because they are winning the information warfare front. You can argue that our -- our -- the media in the United States supports that somewhat.
I don't know if it's -- talking to people I talked to, that was not the intent. But it is a very dicey situation. I understand that. And -- and, hopefully, it is -- it's going to all get sorted out, and they will get the people that did this. I know they got some today.
BLITZER: All right. We will continue to watch this story.
Duncan Hunter is the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.
Mr. Chairman, thanks very much...
HUNTER: Sure.
BLITZER: ... for coming in.
# posted by ATN @ 10:03 PM
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Reliable Sources: Critics On CNN’s Decision to Air Insurgent Sniper Video
On today's edition of CNN's "Reliable Sources," Howard Kurtz spoke about CNN’s decision to air insurgent sniper video. Joining him were Slate Magazine’s John Dickerson, Air America radio talk show host Rachel Maddow, and Salem Radio Network talk show host Michael Medved.
KURTZ: Let me read a CNN statement on this controversy, if I might."The decision to air the insurgents' videotape was a difficult one, but for a news organization, the right one. Our responsibility is to report the news. As an organization, we stand by our decision and respect the rights of others to disagree with it."
Michael Medved, you clearly disagree, and I can understand how some people
would see this footage as repugnant. But...
MEDVED: Well, it's not just that the footage is repugnant, Howard. It's the timing. It's two weeks before an election.
We have indications, Tom Friedman in "The New York Times" has reported that they deliberately are trying to influence the U.S. election. For CNN to be part of this right before the election, seems to me to be dropping the standards for which your network has tried to become known.
KURTZ: If I could clarify one thing, and that is that CNN didn't ask for this tape. CNN, which did not pay for this tape, asked...
MEDVED: Right.
KURTZ: ... for some questions to be answered by the leader -- a leader of the Islamic army and were given two tapes. Answers on one, insurgent snipers on the other. You want to make a point?
DICKERSON: Well, I was going to say, if CNN and other news organizations can't rely on the American people to have the sense to take a look at an entire piece, think it through, several years into a war about the complexities of this war, then we're in a lot bigger trouble than that.
KURTZ: Rachel Maddow, this whole sort of "Who's side are you on?" argument has been used against the media for any story about the war that is perceived as negative, which kind of raises the question of, you know, is it the job of news organizations to essentially function as support personnel or cheerleaders for our side, the American side, in a military conflict?
MADDOW: Well, ideally, what you want is journalistic independence. And you want people to be able to get the facts and decide for themselves.
That said, the American media doesn't function that way and we never have, and we do recognize that we're broadcasting to an American audience, and we make editorial decisions whenever we can as journalists and as commentators to reflect that. I think Michael's point that it's particularly odious that this comes out right before an election, I mean, is the lesson of that that we should make sure that there's only happy news from the war two weeks before the election? Ideally, we want there to be real coverage of the real issues really facing the country heading into the election so people -- people can make smart choices. I don't think we should be more censored.
KURTZ: Let me read a CNN statement on this controversy, if I might."The decision to air the insurgents' videotape was a difficult one, but for a news organization, the right one. Our responsibility is to report the news. As an organization, we stand by our decision and respect the rights of others to disagree with it."
Michael Medved, you clearly disagree, and I can understand how some people
would see this footage as repugnant. But...
MEDVED: Well, it's not just that the footage is repugnant, Howard. It's the timing. It's two weeks before an election.
We have indications, Tom Friedman in "The New York Times" has reported that they deliberately are trying to influence the U.S. election. For CNN to be part of this right before the election, seems to me to be dropping the standards for which your network has tried to become known.
KURTZ: If I could clarify one thing, and that is that CNN didn't ask for this tape. CNN, which did not pay for this tape, asked...
MEDVED: Right.
KURTZ: ... for some questions to be answered by the leader -- a leader of the Islamic army and were given two tapes. Answers on one, insurgent snipers on the other. You want to make a point?
DICKERSON: Well, I was going to say, if CNN and other news organizations can't rely on the American people to have the sense to take a look at an entire piece, think it through, several years into a war about the complexities of this war, then we're in a lot bigger trouble than that.
KURTZ: Rachel Maddow, this whole sort of "Who's side are you on?" argument has been used against the media for any story about the war that is perceived as negative, which kind of raises the question of, you know, is it the job of news organizations to essentially function as support personnel or cheerleaders for our side, the American side, in a military conflict?
MADDOW: Well, ideally, what you want is journalistic independence. And you want people to be able to get the facts and decide for themselves.
That said, the American media doesn't function that way and we never have, and we do recognize that we're broadcasting to an American audience, and we make editorial decisions whenever we can as journalists and as commentators to reflect that. I think Michael's point that it's particularly odious that this comes out right before an election, I mean, is the lesson of that that we should make sure that there's only happy news from the war two weeks before the election? Ideally, we want there to be real coverage of the real issues really facing the country heading into the election so people -- people can make smart choices. I don't think we should be more censored.
# posted by ATN @ 8:02 PM
