Community archive

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Here's one for the media-bashers ....

0 helpful
28 replies

by jardinier

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

I am currently watching a video titled: ?The Paper.? (Michael Keaton, Glenn Close, Randy Quaid, Robert Duvall -- directed by Ron Howard).
It is a pretty fair depiction of life in the newsroom of a major metropolitan daily newspaper. It is recommended viewing for all the know-it-alls who persist in saying that the media deliberately publishes stories without checking all the facts.
It demonstrates how impossible it is in many situations to fully research a hot news item and get it to the presses before being scooped by the opposition.

For anyone who still believes I am disingenuous (thank you for teaching me that word) I will now tell the story of how I came to resign from The Sydney Morning Herald.

It started when I interviewed Ringo Starr at the airport when he arrived in Sydney after a 36 hour flight. He said that there was no such thing as ?The Mersey Beat,? and that the Beatles simply played rock-and-roll. Well this was obviously a hot news story, with the Beatles? drummer contradicting the popular conception that they had created a new form of music. Ringo was also touched by the fact that I asked for his autograph, while all the other reporters were harassing him and trying to put words in his mouth.

I proudly wrote my earth-shattering story, only to find the next day that the sub-editors had seen fit to omit the meat of the item, and say some rubbish about how Ringo has missed his mates as he had travelled to Australia ahead of them.

Some time later I was editor of the Boating Section, which the management was trying to revamp in order to attract more advertising. As I was the only person who had direct contact with the major advertisers, naturally I was in a better position to know what kind of stories they would like to see in this section.

As editor of this section, I had final say in what went to press. I wrote a particular article which, after reading the proofs, the Editorial Manager asked me to change. My conscience and sense of what was a good story (and of course my naivete) forbad me to follow this direct order, and I ran the story as I had written it, knowing that this might cost me my job.

My immediate boss asked me the next morning why I had not rung him, and I said because I knew he would ask me to change the story. He said that if this happened again, I would be sacked.

Well I had a vision for the Boating Section which would have widened its appeal to the general reader, and undoubtedly attracted more advertising support. But the stodgy management could not see this, so that I decided to resign before I got fired.
Had I toed the line, I could have remained in that cushy job for decades.

28 replies

by jimhm

Now was that movie done by MIKE MOORE? - Lets see a movie about a Newspaper Media by the Movie Media - hum would that be a non-bias film full of facts or fiction. Seen it - only a fool would believe that was anything close to the truth.

What was that about the New York times reporter - how about the latest from the Washington paper and the photos of prison sex abuse and sex abuse of Iraq women by US solders were from a Porn site. Hum - Checking Fact's or Printing Fiction?

The Media hasn't reported anything about the UN Child sex abuses in Kosovo and Congo - now they are reporting it in Samala and other UN Peace keeping areas. I guess the blue berretts means "Here's some Candy Little Girl"... Where is that reporting - and the UN has know about this for 2 years!

That movie is a movie - not real life - if you believe movies are anything close to real life - then Beem me up Scotty - there's no intelligent life on this Planet!

by jardinier

or don't know that I have worked on two
metropolitan dailies in Sydney. The film was of
course over-dramatised, but the point about
the difficulty of verifying a story in time to print it
without being scooped by the opposition was
made well enough.

Stick to what you know, Jim, and tell us about
Vietnam.

When you have worked in the media for 10 -
20 years, then you might have something
worth saying.

And if are unable to ever see real life in
movies, then say hello to your fellow ostriches
for me.

by jimhm

Ok Jul - on the same line as your point until you've lived in the US for 10 or 20 years you can't speak of it - unless you servered in WWII or WWI or Korea or Vietnam you can't speak of it. Unless - Unless - Thats Bull - That makes you sound like an Arus - Because I haven't worked in the media for 20 years like you - I can't speak of it. Get real..

If meida wanted to verify the story they wouldn't worry about being "Scooped" by another media organization. Lets see question? Will Printed media ever out scoope FOX News or CNN. Nope.

So why worry about being scooped anymore - back 20 years ago when the paper was the major forum of commincation - OK - today being out scoope doesn't sell.

Question? When will Time or Newsweek ever not be out scooped? So why not verify the story - and just think if it was bogus what kind of a scoope that would be - against CNN or Fox ... Ouch.

And for Real life in a movie - you must be thinking of a Mikey Moore film. Because I haven't seen one that is true to life yet or even close.

Call it artistic license, Movies are ENTERTAINMENT can you say that. Now if you are talking a Documentry now thats a different film style - or a DocuDrama - you may get closer to real life... but a movie is E.N.T.E.R.T.A.I.N.M.E.N.T. Remember Fish Don't Talk like in the Movie Finding Nemo, its just a movie. Old Yeller didn't die it is a movie

So Name me ten movies that were even close to real life.

And of Vietnam - what would you like to know. How many friends I lost - 12 - how many friends that still don't have it together today almost 30 years later 5. How many good American youn died there for nothing - too too many... what do you want to know. Was the Movie "We Were Solders" close to real life - yes - was it real life - No - Was it a great movie Yes - Was it Entertaining Yes... What do you want to know.

by jardinier

is these TR discussions. I have seen so much rubbish, misinformation and bias in so many of the postings that, if TR put it all together and published it, the result would be something that left the general media for dead in terms of misinformation, blatant stupidity and extreme bias.

I could perhaps name a handful of peers, mostly non-Americans (yes, go to town on that one) who I would trust to give a fair, unbiased account of any event which they had witnessed, or give an objective viewpoint on world issues.

I daresay you are well-meaning Jim, but a lot of your postings reveal extreme bias or lack of understanding.

A case in point is the Iraqi POW wearing a pair of ladies panties on his head. What you would be too dense to understand, and totally unwilling to accept, is that these particular humiliations have been carefully calculated to offend the core of Islamic culture.

Things like being stripped naked and forced to masturbate in front of a female; being dragged on a leash like a dog; buggerised by US soldiers and so on.

The immature young soldiers who committed these acts and thought it amusing to photograph them, wouldn't have had the knowledge to devise these specific humiliations themselves, suggesting strongly that the orders came from much higher up.

And, as a gallant soldier, would you prefer to be tortured for six months, or have a nice, painless exit by being beheaded?

And of course the media neither committed these tortures and humiliations, nor took the photographs. The media merely published what was supplied to it by, yes, a patriotic American who was embarrassed and shamed by the negative image of America which these foolish young soldiers were giving to Iraqis.

But as you apparently think it is hilariously funny for a man to have a pair of woman's panties placed over his head, why don't you go to work one day dressed in the same manner and see how funny your company's CEO thinks this is?

by jimhm

I guess when they chop off your sons head - that will be OK then right, or when they hang his burnt and dismember body over a bridge and dance in the streets about - it will be OK.

But Oh God NOOOO - We can offend them - do you understand all they want is any Non-Islamic (and I mean to their way of thinking) DEAD - which includes other islamic peoples.

Do you understand anything about war and battles or do you just like holding that soft bunny rabbit you keep in your pants -

Get real - look what they did in Spain how many were killed - Did they care if Children or women or young or old - did they care if these folks were Islamic - Catholic - christian - non-believers - Did they care about anything other than killing as many as they could.

Those people were non-combatants - the prison is holding combatants - Don't expect me to care about some arus being offended because he had panties on his face - They Offend Me By BeHeading an American - They OFFEND ME By Blowing up a Train Station in Spain - THey Offend Me by Flying Airplanes into Buildings...

You are the most uninformed person I have seen in the Tech forum - concerning war and battles - you have been rasied in a sheeps pen - and thats where the fox and the loin will get you.

by jamesrl

In the early 80s I was heavily involved in Canadian politics.

During a leadership race for the party that was bound to win(the leader becomes prime minister), I was asked by a TV reporter for national news outlet to put together a panel of people who would talk about whether a certain premier(equivalent of governor) would run. It was a nationalo news story because of regional tensions.

I put together a panel of 4, 2 who agreed he would run and 2, including myself, who said he wouldn't. We were filmed for at least 20 minutes, and I thought I gave a good logical rational argument as to why he wouldn't run.

Days later the story came out. I was no where to be seen, and frankly the person who supported my position was weak.

When I saw that reporter a few weeks later, I asked him about it. I said - "what happened to fair and balanced journalism? His reply was; "Someone running for office is a story, someone not running for office isn't a story." I countered - "even if its true?" He then asked me how naive I was.

I took that lesson to heart - its not how close you are to the truth, its how well you sell papers/ads.

James Linn

by oz_media

That's exactly why we can't rely on a single source for information and discount another. The only way to get SOME idea si to look at as many sources from the globe as you can find. There will be left, right (and rarely) a centered opinion.
We need to have the ability to read between the lines or break down reports by removing suggestive phrasing and leading comments to dig out the truth or some verions of it other than those directly reported. Headlines are the big lure, they will instantly try to create bias toward the angle of the story. Don't read the headlines, read between the lines of the story.

Even then, we only get SOME of the picture.

As for having your comments cut out, what's worse is having your comments spliced and diced to mean somethng entirely different than you said. I have givem several press conferences that have ended with numerous stories all offering a different angle. Some will praphrase parts of your comment, others will take the entire comment and attribute it as an answer to a different question entirely.

The only ones I've seen come out as accurate are the ones that actually agree with your statements and find them newsworthy. I've had a copyrighted press release go out and even that was changed by some magazines. The costs and time involved in corrceting them or seekin gjustice isn't worth it though, they just run with whatever they want, but the truth is hidden in there somewhere no matter how much they try and stray from it.

So who do we believe? GWB? Newspapers? Iraqi's? UK reports? Asian reports?

Answer" None of them, no one source is any more correct or misleading than the next. It is OUR job to determine truth on a collaborative level, exactly why I say people who simply take GWB's word are simlpy sheep as they are only hearing what their leader wants them to hear. People who onluy listen to Michael Moore are the same, you must loko at al angles and reports before reaching a conclusion. something that I feel many Americans don't/can't do as it is not the American Way to second guess your own souccres or beliefs, only what the opposition says.

Perhaps this is another reason why I say to look at world news, I am not American and therefore do not feel obligated to rely on a single source of information in order to suport a chosen political party. Perhaps those with little knowledge of US politics or those living outside of America are at a greater advantage in this case, no personal biases are involved.

by dc_guy

Corporations are the aristocracy of the Industrial Era. They have all the power and virtually no accountability.

It will be interesting to see what institution fills this role in the Information Age. The corporate era shows all the signs of coming to a violent end.

Most corporations are in a feeding frenzy, gobbling each other up and selling off their assets to the scavengers. The smart people are no longer managing corporations -- if they were they'd have enough brains to realize that endless offshore outsourcing is destroying their own market. They're all run by holding companies that just skim the profits off the top, and in turn are run by twenty-something MBAs who have no idea what their products are.

This will be some implosion when it all collapses.

by oz_media

"Ok Jul - on the same line as your point until you've lived in the US for 10 or 20 years you can't speak of it - unless you servered in WWII or WWI or Korea or Vietnam you can't speak of it."

It is impossible for the rest of the world to NOT become American history experts. You aren't quiet, expecting everyone to learn about your country. You throw your US patritism down everyone's throats whethyer they like it or not. In fact you can't escape it, where ever you go, there is someone saying how great America is while another is saying how it would suck to be American. There is no mysetery and no it doesn'ttae 10- 20 years to understand America, you have al done a great job of letting the world know what your true colors are, and they aint red white and blue.

Quadrophenia
Backdraft
Rock Star
The Breakfast Club
Band of Brothers (OK miniseries but NOT a documentary)
The Wall
The Verdict
The Full Monty

the list goes on and on. No they aren't real life but they are CLOSE to real life with some Hollywood stuff thrown in. Yes they are entertainment.

This doesn't enforce the point you were attempting to make though.

Michael Moore is as phoney to you as he is REAL to other Americans. YOu say BS, others say fact. Are you now suggesting that you know better than many Americans who are left wing supporters?

I also heavily scrutinize Michael Moores movies but it isn't ALL garbage as his underlying comments and objectives are real. His method of iterating this may be dramatic, but the message is still there and makes logical sense to someone who is not war hungry.

The US national anthem, what your countrymen are bred to sing at every possible opportunity is based wholly on WAR, it is a victory at war song and the US Universities have FIGHT songs.

For one to conclude that the US is only focused on war is really not such a blind observation. You may not think so personally, but you show it nationally in everything you do. We will win, we will not be treated this way, we will not stand for this, we will succeed etc. etc. etc. Unfortunately these are comments mainly heard when reffering to other countries. Michael Moore wasn't so far off in implying that the US is a land of war, guns and violence. It is bred into your every waking moment to the point that you don't even see it anymroe, that's just "being American".

Anyhow, back on the subject here.

After camping last weekend I searched for major news sources all around the world just to compare what is being reported as world headlines, teh US barely even qualified as a reporter of world news, and you're in the middle of a global conflict!

Australia, Iraq, UK, Canada, Germany, and Spain all had VERY similar headlines. When I searched for Us sources I found a listing of HUNDREDS of publications all grouped by state. I decided to try Texas first, great place to see world news right? Wrong. The first 8 or 10 nmewpapers didn't even hae a world news section. A COUPLE had a world news section, so I pawed through the headlines. Iraq? Nope. Just that the Saudis has agreed to reduce the cost of crude oil! ok well this was Texas so we'll forget that as we ALL agree Texas has a single focus, OIL.

Then Colorado, MANY publications there, but VERY littel world news. Most wer just local rags with no 'news' content so that's understandable. They did mention the fact that Iraq's ahd lost some ridiculous number since the beginning of the war. The other headlines ifrom around the world were nowhere to be found though. Hmmmmm.

Washington (Northwest) that's close to home, gotta have something here, well musch to my duismay VERY little world or political news at all, and I scoured MANY publications.

Washington DC, a few headlines were shared, OK I am on to something here. Again, news on how Bush has convinced the Saudis to reduce crude costs (some pictures of unhappy people at the pumps) but nothing else. No mention of how Saudi's are refusing to enter Iraq on policing missions until the US has completely turned over Iraq to the people again.

I started to realize, after sorting through quite a few more publications that it was worse than I thought! There are left wing newspapers, that seem to mirror what the rest of the world is saying but anything else just DOESN'T mention anything at all about Iraq or world news. It's as if they have nothing positive to report, therefore no news is good news? THis also make it VERY easy for Americans to target left wing reports, they haven't heard it anywhere else so it MUST be fabrication. How does the rest of the worlds newspapers all get the same incorrect story then? If I was a Republican and wanted people to see the truth, I'd be pretty quick to show the truth in the newspapers and prove others wrong.

I say the US see what they are SUPPOSED to see, not just the truth, not just the lies. A carefully scripted impression is given instead, hell if you don't report anything and everyone tunes into GWB's press conference to see what's REALLY going on, why would they think otherwise?

This weekend I suggest that you look at ALL world news regardless of personal bias and compare the reports, then compare the general consensus to what is reported in US news, other than just the few you read or deem credible. You will soon see it yourself, yet I doubt you would agree without offereing a personal bias against the alternate sources. So, the rest of the world is wrong. America is right as always, funny how that hapens with no knowledge of what's really going on.

by jimhm

Oz - Backdraft - been a volunteer firefighter since I was 16 - now 51. Never even seen any fires as fake as those in Backdraft - and we've had some biggen's...

As for the years - did you read Jul's - I couldn't speak of Media because I didn't work in Media for 10 or 20 years like she/he did.

by oz_media

My uncle said it was actually quite common in soe buildings as he has been a firefighter, now fire chief for over 30 years in France.

He said that Backdraft was one of the most accurately depicted 'fires' he's ever seen on film. Perhaps his experience supercedes your own and therefore he has actually seen these types of fires more than yourself on the volounteer service.

by jamesrl

I remember talking about Backdraft with my uncle who was a fire captain in Toronto. He thought there was a little too much flame and not enough smoke, but thought overall it was pretty good.

James

by generalist

I have been in several situations where I saw community news being created and was able to observe the reporter in action.

In many instances the resulting newspaper article left out a lot of the main points and managed to mangle a number of the minor points that happened during the community event.

Yet I can see how an outsider could interpret things in different ways. And I can also see how editors might further foul things up with their tinkering.

It is a lot like the game of telephone.

Of course the video media mangles things even more...

by jardinier

by any of the comments so far posted. A newspaper is a business, and part of that business is to compete with opposition newspapers to get the story to the presses and out onto the streets first.

As I appear to be the only member of these forums who comes from a media background, then I think I would be the only person qualified to understand what takes place behind the scenes.

I said: "It is a pretty fair depiction of life in the newsroom of a major metropolitan daily newspaper."

As I have worked on two major metropolitan daily newspapers, then if I say "it is a pretty fair depiction of life in a newsroom," I know what I am talking about, because I have worked in the newsrooms of the The Sydney Morning Herald, (shared by the now defunct Sun) and the Daily Mirror (now defunct, but at the time situated in the same physical space as The Australian and The Daily Telegraph).

And yes, the personal dramas and interactions were very much a part of the whole environment.

As in any company, there were intimate affairs, competition and jealousy.

Do I ever tell you how to run a network or program a computer? No, of course not, because I have never been an IT professional.

I have been a professional journalist and yes, it is a profession. Even now, I can command immediate respect (well, anywhere but on TR) by stating that I trained as a journalist on The Sydney Morning Herald, a newspaper which continues to give a more comprehensive coverage of world news than, I gather, you would find in most US newspapers.

by oz_media

Yes Julian, I agree wholly. One can offer personal comments on any subject but unless you are qualified to speak on the subject all you have to offer is personal feelings or a comclusion based on your own set of morals and rules.

As for being qualified on this subject, that you are. As for being the only person on TR with MEDIA background, bite your tongue lad! You have a journalism background and for that I'd say you are unique here.

Media is a BIG field as you well know, I see the corruption in the magazines I've been interviewed in, the reviews my act have received etc.

For example, the editor of Vancouver's Georgia Straight had reviewed one of the first XXXXXXXX CD's. His article stated that the music was melodic alternative rock and went on and on about local acts here and how the British band XXXXXXXXX has invaded the market in Vancouver.

Well the disk was Heavy Metal (melodic and alternative?) the band was from Vancouver not Britain.

When I called him on his comments, he said he didn't have time to listen to the CD before reviewing it as he had a deadline to meet.

So here's a VERY influencial and respected music paper in Vancouver (actually where Matt Groening started The Simpsons with a cartoon called Life in Hell with Bart being a shriner)that didn't even LISTEN to a CD yet they offered a half page review. The guy's just lucky it wasn't a negative review.

by jardinier

The first occasion was when I was living in Kings Cross, and very involved with the Wayside Chapel. Ted Noffs had set up with a rag magazine to write a story about the undiscovered talent found amongst "street people."

I was not available at the time the reporter made his visit, so Ted asked me to write down what I would like to say about myself, and he would forward it to the magzine.

When the article appeared, the reporter had twisted it around to make me look like a bludger and an idiot.

Ted somehow managed to quell my anger by apologising profusely and offering me some other incentive to overlook the incident.

My girlfriend at the Time, Joannie Trumball, whose father was chief of the New York Times Asian Bureau, was not so forgiving, and wanted me to front up to the magazine and demand an apology, but I could see no point.

The second occasion was when the Australian Newspaper was doing a piece on the New Age Movement. As I was working part-time at a New Age bookshop at the time, the girls nominated me to speak for them.

Apart from describing me as a "hard-core New Ager," the female reporter on the Australian published my comments without a single error, omission or bias. But then the Australian is a pretty responsible newspaper.

This newspaper, Australia's only national newspaper, was established by Rupert Murdoch and ran at a loss for the first 10 years, subsidised by the now defunct Daily Mirror.

But he persevered and this newspaper is one of the most respected in Australia.

by jamesrl

Its not so simple Jim, never has been. Its not Muslims versus Americans. There are more Muslims in South East Asia (Malaysia, Indonesia,Thailand, India) than in the Arab world. When you try and make it that simple you insult alot of people that may have been as horrified as you at the terrorist activity. The Quoran teaches peace(though like the bible there are some seemingly contracdictory passages) and Muslims revered Jesus as a teacher of peace. All religions have mainstreams and radicals. Many sins have been committed under the cloak of religious fervour - by people of many religions, not just Muslim or Christian.

As to understanding about war and battles, ask my father in law. Hardly a bleeding heart liberal, he is a retired Colonel, who has worked with Rumsfeld in the past. Ask General Zinni, who used to command the Middle East theatre. Ask Wesley Clark, ask dozens of British Generals. They all share the same sentiment. And it doesn't agree with yours.

Before you make that direct connection between the prisoners in Iraq and the bombers, did you know that on many occasions Osama called for the ouster, by violent means if necessary, of Saddam Hussein(and the Royal family in Saudi and other Arab leaders)?

As to how people were treated in Abu Ghraib- do you think two wrongs make a right? Do you think abusing prisoners makes further attacks more or less likely? Do you think that the timing of the Nicolas Berg attack was a freak coincidence?

I recommend the book Arrogant Armies by Gwynne Dyer. Written before the war started last year, it goes into the background of Islam, America's role in the middle east, and many other factors.

James

by jimhm

Don't get me wrong. I am not - saying that what has occured in the prison was right or should of been done. But its part of war - its part of being a combatant - you expect if captured you will be interigated - and not "Gee tell me where you are going to attack next - Please". You are in Kiddygarden - expect some pain, or mental tourchers. Yea - not right - but is and will always been done.

What gets my goat, is when people like Jul attempt to justify the beheadings by saying we Offended them by putting womens underware on their heads. That it is the same - that beheading and killing a person is the same as wearing underware. Tell that to Mr. Bergs parents and family.

Then in the same breath she/he/it says nothing about beheading they have done, the thousand injured and murdered in Spain, or the thousands killed in the WTC. And these are all innocent victims!

Right wing in any religon is wrong - Christians during the cursades - that killed many muslims - or what is occuring today. Neither is right. Religon was created by man - written by man - not by God -

What Jul is doing is the same shit the media and people pulled during vietnam - ignored the abuses by the VC and only pointed out what the US did. Neither was correct - but ask your father-in-law what happened to our young men in the VC camps. How well they were treated.

Ask your father-in-law about how the Japaneese treated American POWs during WWII - My father was one of those that landed on Luzon - and told me the stories of the death march. What about the Chineese that the Japaneese Killed during WWII for chemical warfare experments. (Just in ChakingSP) Have they even been held accountable - as media attempts to make the US accountable.

What gets my goat is the double standard that the Media and liberals use. One for them and a higher for the U.S. - Both should be measured by the same yard stick. Otherwise we are going to Loose this battle in Iraq as we did in the Nam. And I for one don't want to see young lives lost because of stupid liberal BS - again.

I said that these people - don't care if the people they kill are Christian or Muslim or what, they want non-muslim (their belief and religon) converted or dead - and they don't care if its from a baby to 100 year old.

Terrorists are like a cancer - must distory every cell - nothing left - and sometimes like cancer - good cells must die to kill the bad cells...

It gets my Goat when people like Jul - think you can sit down with these people and work with them. Never will happen - look what happened in Spain - they were attacked again after the train bomb.... why because they didn't move fast enough.

by oz_media

Well from what I've read, these prisoners were pretty much nobody's anyway. HOw much inside or indepth political and tactical indformation do you think they have?

If they captured YOU in Vietnam what could YOU have told them about America's objectives and strategic movements, nothing ?

You may as well round up all the kids of the resistance and bitch slap them until they talk. Damn Jim, get out of the dark ages, we don't need to sexually humiliate people to get answers or find out what they know.

In fact, just the concept put some panties on my head and make me strip in front of some marine and I am gonna tell you my secrets?? Do these soldiers need a lesson ni human nature or something? Are you suggesting that's how the CIA, FBI or even city police should interrogate people?
"Why were you speeding sir, ?"
"Gee I don't know"
"well here, put these panties on your head and think about what you've done for a minute"

Interrogative measures....Who the hell do you think you are fooling?

by oz_media

Well I assume yuo are saying that you have experience in firefighting as you were putting out blazes at age 16.

As mentioned in my last response, my uncle was on the phone with me just after the movie came out and he said GO see Backdraft, it is the most realistic movie of fire behaviour I've ever seen on file. He also said it was a directorial first, even though the romance and other fluff was there, he insisted he had seen many similar fires. Now as he's only been a fireman for a little over 30 years , a fire chief for 12, he probably wouldn't know as much as yourself, having volounteered at 16, but he does have a fairly good idea I would suspect.

by jimhm

Now I see your ignorance, lets see would the information a pilot in vietnam had be worth anything after 2 months of capture. Nope! But still on a daily basis these men were tourchered to give up information. Gee All Great and WiZe and Powerful OZ tell me Why - Please -

Lets see COULD WE CALL THAT ABUSE!

God you aren't worth arguring with...

by jamesrl

If you sign a convention like the Geneva convention, and you tell everyone you are the champion of human rights freedom and democracy, then you ought to follow the convention. Or tell the world you no longer follow it. But you can't tell everyone you still follow it and then turn around and not do it.

Secondly agreed that the kind of information you get from torture is pretty much useless.

Saudi officials arrested a Canadian and Britain regarding a car bomb which killed another British citizen. They tortured him. He and others confessed. Despite the fact that they didn't do it, were close friends with the person killed, etc.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/sampson/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/06/60minutes/main615986.shtml

So if you expect to use it as a reliable means of getting good intel - its not proven.

James

by oz_media

"But still on a daily basis these men were tourchered to give up information."

I am not sure i see what you are trynig to say. Are you implying that torure is part of war? That all prisoners will be tortured regardless of any information they may or may not have?

If so, is THAT your justification for these guys torturing Iraqi prisoners? REALLY? You think it's eye for an eye and all that? So why didn't GWB carpet bomb Baghdad with mustard gas instead of spending billions in an attempt to liberate Iraq?

This invasion hasn't stopped terrorism, as you MUST know by now, Al-Qaeda are said to be stronger than ever now in over 60 countries, they are supposedly planning another devastating attack on the US for late summer etc. Hmmmm, July 4th is coming up. So the whole protect America think is a complete farce, the Liberate Iraq is a farce because apprently in Jim's world, it's OK to torture the enemy while trying to show the remaining cuitizens what a great country you have.
I guess it was for the oil then all along! GWB has already begged the Saudis to reduce crude costs, he has tried to privatize the oil (which Iraqi's were firmly opposed to before).

What is your purpose there Jim, to torture the torturers (which the prisoners are not), to show how kind and warm the American occupation can be or to get more ersources for your own country?

It certainly isn't to stop terrorism, AlQaeda suspects are being aquitted and lightly sentenced if not having hearings postponed due to US reluctance to share information with their defense and offering a fair trial (that's unconstitutional isn't it?).

You are stil under just as great a threat as you wre before infact moreso SINCE the Iraqi invasion, just what exactly have you proven other than everyone's original speculations that it would be a big mess that resolved nothing?

Do not refer to Vietnam, that was many years ago and cannot be used to justify modern day actions.

Do not refer to WMD, because you haven't saved yourselves from anything.

All you have done, as predicted by most outside America, is spend money, kill citizens and some hostiles, capture an old man in a hole who wasn't a direct or immediate threat to yourself or your country, spend some MORE money (your money Jim, not mine), ignore the wishes of your allies and your own, torure some prisoners and have it shown around the world, ignore the voice of NATO (whereas if it was Germany that went against NATO, you'd be invading Germany) and then spout to the rest of the world what a bunch of spineless asssholes they are for not helping.

News flash, they ARE helping now despite your coutry and countrymen slandering them. It is clear to the rest of the world that you cannot do this alone, as was first suggested when Yosemite Sam said to invade anyway in the first place.

How does this benefit JimHM?

What has your president given YOU that would make you vote for him again?

What has your president done for your country that would make him a unique and irreplacable leader of the free world?

How long do you really think you'll be a world super power if you continue this waty?

Well Bush won that's for sure. His campaugn supporters and personal buddies get cheaper crude from the Saudi's, he will soon be buying as much oil from Iraq as he and his buddies choose to. He has won some form of support from a bunch of Americans like yourself who seem to think he's done a great job.

At least Canada's resolution was that the government would reduce taxation on Gas so the price can be capped. We didn't kill anyone, but we are still helping to Liberate Iraq, and Afghanistan (which you may have forgotten is still in need of support).

by jardinier

I have mentioned only ONE instance of when a particular sub-editor chose to change the slant of my story (about Ringo Starr). And this was the ONLY incident during my career as a journalist when a story, by no means of international importance, had the angle substantially changed by a sub-editor.

The incident with the Boating Section was of no significance as it was not a news story, and the Editorial manager did not not want me to change the content of the story, but only the leading paragraph.

Many of you have jumped on the band-waggon with first-hand experiences of misreporting. Let me assure you, however, that in my personal experience the newspapers strive to report the news accurately.

As my experience is with Sydney newspapers, I cannot say that this applies in any other countries.

But I can assure you that I have been hauled over the coals by the News Editor when I got the facts wrong in a couple of quite insignificant stories.

On one occasion on the Sydney Morning Herald, two cadet journalists were sacked, with no argument, for making an error in the Shipping Movements column, by giving the wrong arrival date for a passenger liner.

One journalist on the Daily Mirror, who was assigned to cover a story about a bovine in a China shop (which happened to be a cow) decided the story would sound better if he said it was a bull, hence big front page heading: "Bull in China Shop."

He was sacked on the spot.

by mlayton

...I thought the movie "Shattered Glass" was fascinating. You might find it interesting, too.

by jardinier

There is a saying, Jim, that it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought to be stupid, than to open it and PROVE you are stupid.

You are stupid -- we all know that well enough -- but your postings, in all discussions, are becoming increasingly offensive.

I would have no hesitation in putting you in the same category as our recent visitor, Garion11.

And just so we can understand where you are coming from regarding Vietnam, would you please tell us whether, at the time you went to Vietnam, you were already serving in the military; you volunteered; or you were conscripted.

I would like to know whether you actually like going to war, or whether you had no choice.

by antipodes

Yes Jim, you are free to express your views, but can't you just do that without casting aspersions on the integrity of Julian?

So what if he does not revel in shedding blood as you obviously do? Is that not his right?

In a recent discussion, when asked by Maxwell to explain his core beliefs, Julian said he attempted to follow the teachings of Jesus, who was a left-wing peacemaker.

Do you put yourself above the Christ?

by dwdino

Just watched a movie that was quite good and along these lines:

Murder Live

I will leave all to their own conclusions.

This discussion is closed to new replies.