Daniel Terdiman reports:
For most of Saturday, CNN.com had no stories about the massive protests on behalf of Mir Hossein Mousavi, who was reported by the Iranian government to have lost to the sitting president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The widespread street clashes--nearly unheard of in the tightly controlled Iran--reflected popular belief that the election had been rigged, a sentiment that was even echoed, to some extent, by the U.S. government Saturday....
Increasingly, Twitter has become the go-to source for breaking news about any kind of notable event, be it an earthquake, terrorist attacks in Mumbai, or post-election riots in Tehran. Yet many Twitter users found CNN's lack of attention to what could end up being one of the biggest stories in years appalling.....
Posts
46 comments:
We are warned in the Bible to not call other human beings - all made in the image of God - "fools".
It is, however, getting difficult to find a better replacement term to describe the person who believes it is possible for Iran to hold unrigged elections.
Yeah, yeah, sorry but I can't use it as long as it's called "Twitter" and "tweeting". What are we, 4 years old? If you want to be an adult company doing important adult things other than being a casual social network, you need a name that doesn't irritate and embarrass adults in polite conversation.
Of course, there don't seem to be many adults in America anymore. Certainly few in government and media.
Follow the money - who at CNN was paid not to cover news from Iran?
They are liberal and corrupt, but they are dishonest.
CNN is just not cutting it.
Coup is a better term than fraud:
Please don’t use the word "fraud" because it is mitigation of what has happened in Iran. Fraud is what was happening in the past 30 years. This is not fraud. They haven’t [counted ] people’s votes. Using the word fraud is like calling a deep cut a small scratch. There was no fraud; it was a coup.
My complaints about "Twitter" are in no way meant to imply that CNN is the "adult alternative". "Twitter" sounds like something for twerps, twits, twats and tots, but CNN doesn't even rise to that level. I'd rather "tweet" with the "twits" than listen to the closet-case faggot Vanderbilt heir emote his way to another Emmy, all the while ignoring what's actually going on in the world. Who watches CNN anyway?
CNN supports dictators in order to have access to markets. That was proven when they compromised with Saddam in covering up his crmes in exchange for beng allowed to broadcast. Why be surprised that they avoid offending their Iranian Masters now.
Do you really think they are going to jeopardize their access to the tyrants in Tehran by reporting this?
CNN to World: Nothing to see here. Move along.
Andrew Sullivan, lately not my favorite commenter, has been doing yeoman’s work on Iran, the past few days. Kudos to him.
Sullivan is not doing a well as other sites. Here is the Iranian opposition twitter feed.
Patterico also has a pretty good summary of events.
Quayle, I take that back. Sully is actually doing a decent job. I am still pissed off at him for his Palin slanders and libels, but credit where credit is due.
CNN- #4 and falling fast.
I'd like to see CNN respond to the charge they may be pulling punches so they can stay in Iran. They did that during Saddam's reign in Iraq, and are probably doing it now in Iran.
CNN supports dictators in order to have access to markets
Don't forget Cuba.
This is just another result of the news services, including CNN, abrogating their journalistic responsibilities. Give CNNs coziness with Saddam Hussein a decade plus ago, I wouldn't be surprised if they're in the bag with the Iranian leadership for the very same reasons: keep their mouths shut and they can stay.
Fred,
"Coup" is only used when the Republicans take power through democratic means.
I’m with Quayle and Fred4Pres in regard to Sullivan. I am among the chief sinners when it comes to ripping Sully, but the last three days and especially the last 24-36 hours, he has been on the side of the angels. He is churning out post after post and he is getting a lot of on the ground reporting from students in Teheran, not to mention some great pictures and youtubes.
I don’t watch CNN, but I have no trouble believing they have fallen down on the job. More troubling, as reported by Sully, Christopher Dickey of Newsweek has given his imprimatur to the new regime, as has the EU (no surprise there). Christopher Dickey, WTF? Dickey reported from the front lines in Nicaragua, for crying out loud! How the mighty have fallen.
Instapundit nailed it: CNN is corrupt. It's probably made a deal with the regime for access in exchange for better press. They did it with Saddam--so why not with Ahmadinefraud?
One person I am following (thanks to @amba12) is @persiankiwi. Obviously, I don't know if they are real or not. Anyone else have good people to follow on Twitter or Iranian websites to look at for info?
every major news station seems to have a theme that they focus on all the time that isn't really related to news... logical conclusion: listen to public radio or watch PBS
Journalistic responsibilities, watchdog media?!; a bill of goods sold to a bunch of rubes weaned on carefully crafted Hollywood and media memes.
The MSM has never been impartial or unbiased. They have always served their preferred political philosophy. As one media format bled into the next; newspapers, radio, TV the media held sway not by excellence or devotion to "truth" but via federally enabled monopolies and the citizenry's naivete.
Not until cable pierced the MSM facade did we catch a glimpse of the self-serving people behind the mask of journalistic fairness. Alas, CNN soon fell in step with the cognoscenti to curry favor and gain access.
The real game changer occurred when the Internet allowed ordinary people to share and report events on the ground in real time and expose the MSM mythos for what it always was; a fairy tale.
Every one here has probably had an "a ha!" moment when the story simply didn't jibe with what we saw for ourselves.
My choice on the news from Iran is michael totten. He is doing an outstanding job as usual. He is one of the real go to guys for the Middle East. And he is also very honest. A libertarian who calls 'em as he sees 'em. Worth while reading on anything to do with the Middle East, especially when it comes to Lebanon. He has lived in Beirut off and on for several years.
Another great example that liberal bias in the media most often is revealed by the stories that they ignore.
Palladin - give the twitter thing a rest, mate.
Focus on the content and the context.
Hey, any thoughts on the US being less popular in Iran than we were last year?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_iran_poll
Palladian - give the twitter thing a rest, mate.
I don't know, I for one am impressed with his suave maturity. I bet his fingers are even steepled.
FWIW, Late Saturday night I tuned to Fox to see what was going on in Iran, but they had whats-her-bucket Prejean, the deposed (dethroned? defrocked? you wish) Miss California. I tuned to CNN and they were covering Iran. Tuned in to CNN this morning and they were on Iran again.
So is the complaint that they were slow off the mark and missed most of Saturday? Is this a pattern with CNN?
Just got cable back after months without tv. I dreamed I had HBO and was so happy I cried (in the dream) so I signed up again.
CNN is also running a story a day to promote Obama's health care initiative. Today's is "Health Care Costs Choking Small Businesses." I wonder what it will be tomorrow.
Sullivan has a list of different twitters, almost 50. Evidently the university students are being attacked by some sort of thug militia group called Ansr-Hezbolah (not to be confused with the other Hezbollah). There is a picture of a dorm room door riddled with bullet holes, evidently from an automatic or semi-automatic weapon. The police and militia groups appeared to have escalated things.
Again, let me doff my hat to Sullivan. He is, as Quayle and Fred4Pres said, doing yeomen work. Wonder what CNN is covering, June weddings?
For most of Saturday, CNN.com had no stories about the massive protests on behalf of Mir Hossein Mousavi
For most of the decade, CNN had no stories about the rape rooms and torture chambers that they knew about. They deliberately withheld that information from the public, in exchange for "access" to Saddam. And yes, they swallowed.
So we're suprised?
Hey, any thoughts on the US being less popular in Iran than we were last year?
Well, obviously, Obama inherited a reputation broken by 8 years of mismanagement. And he's only been in office 6 months. And Bush is Hitler. We won! You need to get over it! [insert more leftist excuses as they come to mind]
[assume FIERCE MORAL URGENCY]
blah blah blah, spin blah blah intellectual backflip blah.
[Target, Isolate, Polarize]
[draw False Equivalence]
[play Race Card]
Andrew Sullivan, lately not my favorite commenter, has been doing yeoman’s work on Iran, the past few days. Kudos to him.
Sorry, but FUCK Andrew Sullivan. There are information brokers that aren't racist misogynist bigots. I'm done with him.
The people in Iran are captives of the Islamic Revolution. Another little problem caused by electing Jimmy Carter I, and now we have Jimmy Carter II surrendering ASAP. CNN is simply trying to keep up their role as Agitprop for the Ruling Democrats.
Frodo,
Sullivan may have been doing a decent job but he just blew any good will by comparing Rove and Palin to Ahmadinejad.
The Iranians dug their own graves 30 years ago. I don't give a shit what happens there.
Palladian:
If you want to be an adult company doing important adult things other than being a casual social network, you need a name that doesn't irritate and embarrass adults in polite conversation.
As in [being] adult, how? You mean that stuff my parents and all those other adults were doing on and amongst their porches and stoops back in the day, while their kids played prisoners base, ghost, endless variations of tags & etc. etc.
Good lord, man. Do you not remember some of the "how twee they were!" catchphrases and etc. they used, back then? Don't let the remembered ties and dresses and other freshly, sharply pressed things obscure your memory. The adults then engaged in conversation and badinage every bit as petty and juvenile as what you can see now, in their own contextual (and even transcending their own contextual) way.
OK, you don't like the word "twitter"; you hate the word "tweet." I wouldn't have chosen those names, either: OMFG, so ICK! Writing that betrays my own attachment to the very preconceptions and bias which I understand more than you know.
So--what, then? If the name ain't all that aesthetic, or the idea behind it aesthetical enough, it's all-out-the-back-door time, baby, bath water and everything else?
Tell me again why, in all your purity, you're a bloghound (like the rest of us), and even online at all?
Lighten up, honey.
Heave away, sweetie.
Yeah, yeah, sorry but I can't use it as long as it's called "Twitter" and "tweeting". What are we, 4 years old? If you want to be an adult company doing important adult things other than being a casual social network, you need a name that doesn't irritate and embarrass adults in polite conversation.
Walkie Talkie!
(Heh)
In the wonderful world of Twitter, the always brilliant @reader_iam posted an interesting link to an article claiming that the Iranian election results are probably accurate. It gave me some insights about Democracy. There are interesting things happening in Iran.
In the predictable world of the bloggosphere, people are dissing Twitter, CNN, and each other.
Palladian is right.
What kind of a name is Tweeter?
Increasingly, Twitter has become the go-to source for breaking news about any kind of notable event
I'm seeing absolutely no support for this assertion in the article. The author doesn't cite anything specific about Iran that anyone said on Twitter (as opposed to criticizing CNN's lack of coverage). Typical Twitter media overhype.
Sullivan was doing a remarkable job reporting on the events in Iran until he posted THE ROVIAN ISLAMIST post at 3:17 pm yesterday:
Ahmadinejad's bag of tricks is eerily like that of Karl Rove - the constant use of fear, the exploitation of religion, the demonization of liberals, the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin:
WHAT is Sullivan talking about? Bush Derangement Syndrome+Palin Trig Trutherism+CRAZY
I assume most Americans don't care - which is why they aren't covering it. They have more important matters to cover - like David Letterman making a joke about Bristol Palin. And Obama having mustard on his hamburger.
... logical conclusion: listen to public radio or watch PBS
Those lying socialist wankers? "logical conclusion"?! YGBSM!
I quit listening to PBS even before I quit watching TV network news and reading the NY Times.
Largo, that was hilarious. I wasn't familiar with that comedian, but now my interest is piqued.
Post a Comment