Skip to comments.Should Reuters be investigated?
Posted on 08/10/2006 1:05:04 PM PDT by AmericanMade1776
Blog investigation forced the vaunted British news agency to withdraw the Beirut photos of Adnan Hajj and fire the photographer. Is this just the tip of the iceberg? Should Reuters be investigated and, if so, by whom? PJMs Roger Simon moderates this exclusive podcast discussion with Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post, Cliff May of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy and Thomas Lifson of The American Thinker.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicscentral.com ...
I suggest CBS do the investigation. Oustanding fact checkers there I am told.
If Reuters is best Known for it's news coverage, but that only accounts for 10 percent of their company's income.....Is it possible that Reuters is slanting their news to influence financial markets.
Reuters is relying on the "Trust Principles" , but the trust has been broken
Investigating them would put the media on notice, that it's actions were not going get the usual free pass any longer. It would allow the merits of the case against the MSM to be aired in public. That probably wouldn't be a bad thing.
It'll never happen. IMO
Would be great fictional entertainment.
Investigated by WHOM?
The Reuters Building
Tel: + 44 (0)20 7250 1122
Public opinion is the moderating body in this case. If they lose trust they lose readers.
Should Reuters be investigated? With all certainty. Just like with CBS, Reuters should be called on the carpet along with the islamic journalist and made to answer the lies Reuters is perpetrating upon the public consciousness.
They don't just lose readers , they loose financial clout and investors
Sort of reminds me of the story I read about the Battle of Waterloo. Seems that Napoleon was marching toward Waterloo, and the whole world was experiencing the jitters. The Rothschild family received a messenger pigeon from one of their operatives at the front. Napoleon had been defeated.
So the Rothschilds spread the news that Napoleon had been victorious. The stock market crashed. They bought up all the stocks at rock bottom prices.
Then a horse and rider arrived in London to reveal the truth, and the stock market soared.
They did not have the SEC in those days, so they got away with it.
Thank you for posting that, I saw it earlier, it is very damning to the coverage that Reuters is providing on the war in Lebanon.
I am thinking that Reuters is slanting the news , for Personal gain, influencing money markets.
The Reuters Building in Canary Wharf
The news organization has been accused of showing liberal bias, especially in its media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, by sources such as the National Review and the Wall Street Journal's editorial division. Some allegations are based on Reuters own admissions of doctored photographs or unprofessional behavior.  Other accusations are prompted by the use of words such as "militants" or "guerrillas" instead of "terrorists" for groups that deliberately murder civilians in pursuit of political objectives. The September 20, 2004 edition of the The New York Times reported that Reuters Global Managing Editor, David A Schlesinger, objected to Canadian newspapers editing Reuters articles through inclusion of the word "terrorist," stating that "my goal is to protect our reporters and protect our editorial integrity."  Critics claim that Reuters' avoidance of these words is selective , reflecting a larger bias against the United States , Israel , Jews , or Western values in general .
I suppose that's possible. It would have to be shown to be the case. I suspect it's just drifting on a sea of moral equivelency. Like much of the world's leftists, it's staff hasn't a clue...
That isn't a valid excuse BTW.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.