Lara Logan, after being slapped on the wrist with a six month suspension, is back in the house that Walter Cronkite built.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainm...story.html
"Disputed story"? What disputed story was this?
Oh, right, the crackpot Benghazi conspiracy story based solely upon the completely un-vetted, unchecked and non-corroborated testimony of one man. "Should have done a better job" is a profound understatement for what is, at best, gross negligence.
Still, it was surprising that she served a 6 month sentence at the conservative penalty box. Normally, one would expect someone like Logan to be back on the air after only 30 days. This standard penalty is known in some circles as "The Halperin Rule", where he was suspended for calling Obama "a dick".
It just goes to show you that if you're a conservative or pushing a conservative agenda, the corporate media will not hold you to any standard. You can act unprofessionally, commit journalistic malpractice or get something horribly wrong and the worst price you'll ever have to pay is a temporary suspension.
Meanwhile, if you are either a liberal or you run a story that supports a liberal perspective, you are treating on thin ice! Watch your step because your career hangs by a thread. Any slight misstep and you are gone! Fired! No second chances!
This 60 Minutes Benghazi debacle seems reminiscent of a similar problem Dan Rather had regarding his report of W Bush's National Guard service, but arguably the journalistic mistake was less extreme.
I would argue that being misled by allegedly forged documents and having a former National Guard officer as your source is less of a mistake than running a story about some guy's unchecked testimony. Nevertheless, Dan Rather was fired. His nearly quarter century tenure at CBS was of no help to him.
And then there was Phil Donahue who was fired for being a liberal in 2003. Big mistake. The corporate media was cheerleading the run up to the war in Iraq at that time. Any liberal on air was well-advised to hunker down and be very quiet until the whole situation deteriorated, as liberals warned would happen.
Alec Baldwin called an obnoxious paparazzi stalking his kids "a fag" off the air. Fired! Gone! No second chances!
Keith Olbermann donated money to Democratic candidates (he was not a anchor but a well-known liberal commentator). Fired!
Dylan Ratigan, gone! Why, not sure.
Rachel Maddow still has her little oasis of journalism, her own "Rick's Café Américain" in corporate occupied media. For now...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainm...story.html
Quote:NEW YORK — CBS News’ Lara Logan is back to work at “60 Minutes” more than six months after being ordered to take a leave of absence for her role in a disputed story on the deadly 2012 raid at the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.
"Disputed story"? What disputed story was this?
Quote:The story relied on the testimony by Dylan Davies, a security contractor who said he was at the scene of the raid that since then has become a key Republican criticism of the Obama administration. But his story fell apart and it turned out there was no evidence he was there, and CBS issued a correction.
The internal CBS review of the incident concluded Logan and her “60 Minutes” colleagues should have done a better job checking out Davies’ story before it went on the air.
Oh, right, the crackpot Benghazi conspiracy story based solely upon the completely un-vetted, unchecked and non-corroborated testimony of one man. "Should have done a better job" is a profound understatement for what is, at best, gross negligence.
Still, it was surprising that she served a 6 month sentence at the conservative penalty box. Normally, one would expect someone like Logan to be back on the air after only 30 days. This standard penalty is known in some circles as "The Halperin Rule", where he was suspended for calling Obama "a dick".
It just goes to show you that if you're a conservative or pushing a conservative agenda, the corporate media will not hold you to any standard. You can act unprofessionally, commit journalistic malpractice or get something horribly wrong and the worst price you'll ever have to pay is a temporary suspension.
Meanwhile, if you are either a liberal or you run a story that supports a liberal perspective, you are treating on thin ice! Watch your step because your career hangs by a thread. Any slight misstep and you are gone! Fired! No second chances!
This 60 Minutes Benghazi debacle seems reminiscent of a similar problem Dan Rather had regarding his report of W Bush's National Guard service, but arguably the journalistic mistake was less extreme.
Quote:Rather and CBS initially defended the story, insisting that the documents had been authenticated by experts.[33] CBS was contradicted by some of the experts it originally cited,[34] and later reported that its source for the documents – former Texas Army National Guard officer Lt. Col. Bill Burkett – had misled the network about how he had obtained them.
I would argue that being misled by allegedly forged documents and having a former National Guard officer as your source is less of a mistake than running a story about some guy's unchecked testimony. Nevertheless, Dan Rather was fired. His nearly quarter century tenure at CBS was of no help to him.
And then there was Phil Donahue who was fired for being a liberal in 2003. Big mistake. The corporate media was cheerleading the run up to the war in Iraq at that time. Any liberal on air was well-advised to hunker down and be very quiet until the whole situation deteriorated, as liberals warned would happen.
Alec Baldwin called an obnoxious paparazzi stalking his kids "a fag" off the air. Fired! Gone! No second chances!
Keith Olbermann donated money to Democratic candidates (he was not a anchor but a well-known liberal commentator). Fired!
Dylan Ratigan, gone! Why, not sure.
Rachel Maddow still has her little oasis of journalism, her own "Rick's Café Américain" in corporate occupied media. For now...
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
![[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1140.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn569%2Fthesummerqueen%2FUntitled2_zpswaosccbr.png)
