14 August 2003

Journalistic intelligence - oxymoron?

[source, source] "This article":http://msnbc.com/news/951575.asp?0cv=CA01 [later edited] claimed that US agents had foiled an "international plot" to attack passenger aircraft in the US with man portable anti-aircraft missiles. "Another article":http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/13/international/worldspecial2/13TERR.html?hp=&pagewanted=all makes the claim that "No real terrorists were ever connected to the plot". "ABC News":http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/missile030813_sting.html reported that much of the alleged missile plot was a government setup from start to finish". All of these are a major league "duh!" since it has been known from the first announcement that this was a sting operation in which the buyers were US agents. These stories seem to have been written automatically with the lines about terrorists inserted as stock phrases that are not understood by the authors.
Posted by orbital at 7:52 PM | View 0 TrackBacks | Trackback URL


[source, source]
A United Nations panel of experts says the UN should have the power to investigate and censure multi-national companies involved in human rights abuses. The UN sub-commission for the promotion and protection of human rights has adopted a draft code of conduct which could lead to large firms facing similar obligations as governments.
This is a brilliant plan by the UN. Not only will this cause the creation of thousands of cushy jobs for relatives and friends of current UN staffers but the possibilities for blackmail and extortion of multi-national companies and their governments is almost unlimited.
Posted by orbital at 7:40 PM | View 0 TrackBacks | Trackback URL

BBC Bias Watch

[source, source]
Newsnight reporter Susan Watts today denounced the BBC's "attempts to mould" her stories in what she believed was a "misguided strategy" to "corroborate" Andrew Gilligan's controversial report on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme. In an extraordinary development at the Hutton inquiry today, Watts revealed she felt compelled to seek separate legal representation because of pressure from her BBC managers to reveal David Kelly as her main source in order to corroborate Gilligan's story - a move she felt "was misguided and false".
The BBC pressuring its own reporters to corroborate stories? Why would they need to do that if the story was true? Although that answers itself.
Posted by orbital at 7:16 PM | View 0 TrackBacks | Trackback URL