Corruption at CNN

Washington Times ^ | 4/15/03 | Peter Collins

[kattracks]

Mr. Eason Jordan's admission that CNN had to suppress the news from Baghdad in order to report it brought back memories for me.

In January 1993, I was in Baghdad as a reporter for CNN on a probationary, three-month contract. Previously, I had been a war reporter for CBS News in Vietnam and East Asia and in Central America for ABC News. I had also made three trips to Baghdad for ABC News before the Gulf War.

[Deb]

Do these jerks have any more credibility to lose?

[Howlin]

We shall see.

[Timesink]

Flashback to Major Garrett's firing at CNN (note both links are now dead):

CNN putting style and glitz over substance? In a surprise move last week CNN fired Major Garrett, its number two White House correspondent, and replaced him with MSNBC's Suzanne Malveaux. With the retirement of Washington Bureau Chief Frank Sesno, both the New York Times and the AmericanProwler.com Web site suggested AOL Time Warner executives are now making moves to jazz up the on-air presentation.

     As for Garrett, New York Times reporter Jim Rutenberg revealed that the new executives "question whether Mr. Garrett had the breakout quality the network was seeking." In other words, not glitzy enough. The AmericanProwler.com site speculated that Bob Novak is so upset by the changes to Crossfire that he may quit the show.

     An excerpt from Rutenberg's May 6 New York Times story:

The announcement last week that Major Garrett, the CNN White House correspondent, would be leaving the network came as a surprise to his colleagues in Washington. It also was a shock to Mr. Garrett -- and the manner of his dismissal has roiled the bureau, CNN staff members said....

The apparent harshness in the way the dismissal was handled sent a chill through the Washington offices of CNN, a subsidiary of AOL Time Warner.

It has also added to a sense of unease at the bureau that is growing as CNN executives continue to make changes....

CNN executives said the dissatisfaction among those on the Washington staff was regrettable, but perhaps to be expected. Mr. Garrett's departure, they said, was just one of the changes at CNN since the completion of the merger of its former parent company, Time Warner, and America Online last year.

The new CNN management -- led by Jamie Kellner, the Turner Broadcasting System chief executive, and Walter Isaacson, the CNN chairman -- was said to question whether Mr. Garrett had the breakout quality the network was seeking.

"The whole strategy is to keep our programming focused on our top correspondents," said an executive at CNN. The executive added that the network was being a lot more selective about whom it puts on the screen and was "really trying to draw out the top anchors like Jonathan Karl or John King or Kate Snow or Kelly Wallace" -- the Washington correspondents currently in favor....

     END of Excerpt.

     For the entire story: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/06/business/media/06CNN.html

     The AmericanProwler Web site examined the changes at CNN in a piece posted on Tuesday. An excerpt:

....Part of the problem with the sudden exits, say CNN insiders, was the retirement last year of longtime bureau chief Frank Sesno, who targeted print reporters such as John King (former AP reporter) and Garrett and turned them into TV reporters. Sesno is credited with building up an esprit de corps in a bureau that was best known as the D.C. perch for talkmeister Larry King.

"All we were known for was Larry King and the shoutfests on 'Crossfire,'" says the researcher. "Frank really made us into a topflight network news bureau that competed with broadcast networks. He made us legitimate and he defended the bureau from the suits in [corporate headquarters] Atlanta."

And once Sesno walked, the bureau became the plaything of AOL-Time Warner executives like Walter Isaacson, who lately has been spending increasing amounts of time in Washington. "We're all a little nervous now," the researcher says. "Every time he shows up, another head gets lopped off."

With sudden departures from CNN becoming seemingly the norm, additional rumors are beginning to spread, including one that has longtime CNN talent Robert Novak considering an exit. One of the founding hosts of "Crossfire" and the creator of "The Capital Gang," Novak is said to be disenchanted with the newly formatted "Crossfire" show and at the very least would like out of that show.

"Everyone here thinks it's funny that conservatives won't go on the show because they think Carville and Begala are unfair to them," says the CNN news producer. "When the real reason they shouldn't want to go on is because it's just not very good."

     END of Excerpt

     For the piece in full: http://www.americanprowler.com/article.asp?art_id=2002_5_7_2_45_19

[what's up]

Terry Keenan, financial reporter. I thought she always looked sad at CNN. She is always smiling now.

[justshe]

Here's hoping that Fox News gets some tidbits from Garrett and Keenan to share with us!

[cyncooper]

On the way back to Baghdad, I explained to other reporters what I thought had happened, and wrote a report that was broadcast on CNN that night. The next day, Brent Sadler, CNN's chief reporter at the time in Baghdad (he is now in northern Iraq), came up to me in a hallway of the al Rasheed Hotel. He had been pushing for the interview with Saddam and had urged Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan to come to Baghdad to help seal the deal. "Petah," he said to me in his English accent, "you know we're trying to get an interview with Saddam. That piece last night was not helpful."

So now we will learn of reporters, not just executives, who knowingly decided to air propaganda, or urged their colleagues to do so.

Joe Scarborough had the reporter from New Republic on tonight and showed the quotes from the female CNN reporter on matters like Saddam's last "election. CNN had bent over backwards to be his mouthpiece, as she assured viewers that the "election" was an affirmation of the love the people of Iraq had for Saddam (gag).

In a separate piece, this same female had reported on prisoners being released, and editorialized that this showed how the charges of human rights violations were pretty much over-blown. So it's much more than wanting to protect lives by keeping mouths shut. They actively worked to present lies to their viewers world-wide. Something some of us suspected for years, but it sounded kind of nuts and Pravda-ish.

[hole_n_one]

Greta Van Susteren was CNN's "legal analyst"

[cyncooper]

And remember the other day when Iraqi UN guy al Douri was leaving New York for Syria -- he made a point of going over to the CNN guy and giving him a big hug and kiss.

The second segment of Brit's roundtable tonight talked about CNN's treachery. He ended the program with that very clip.

[WOSG]

Compromised News Network

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

I wonder how many horror stories we're going to hear now from various ex-associates of CNN.

[Terridan]

AND WHEN, WHEN WILL WE BE RID OF CHRISTIAN AMANHORE????

[wasp69]

Could we actually be watching the destruction of the most slanted news channel in America? Could this be the day many of us have been waiting for?

[KingKongCobra]

We can only hope.

[litany_of_lies]

Well it is not exactly a recent case

The fact that it's so old is very important. It means that CNN has been playing patsy for over 10 years, and pressuring its reporters to spin their news in a pro-Saddam or neutral direction for that entire period of time.

Also, what's discussed is a pretty serious situation. A reporter sees through a sham claim by the Iraqis and is told it's not helpful. Message to everyone else: see no evil, hear no evil, toe the line.

What an incredible disgrace. Just imagine if a CNN reporter was caught covering the tracks of a conservative American president. He/she would be fired on the spot. Or if a news organization like AP or Reuters did the same. Heads would roll.

[antaresequity]

Well it is not exactly a recent case of bias

I don't see bias as much as greed...at least from the reporters persepective.

This appears to be nothing more than a gross violation of public trust; breach of professional ethics.

All done at the expense of the truth for personel agrandizement and enrichment...

I suppose a case for bias could be made if by concealing the truth, and perpetuating lies and propoganda it somehow furthered CNN's agenda. Is it possible to conclude that CNN has an agenda that perputuates human suffering? I just think CNN was greedy and the truth didn't matter.

[Political Junkie Too]

Brent Sadler

Remember that Sadler is the journalist who shot his way through Tikrit over the weekend. Talk about making the news...

-PJ

[Travis McGee]

CNN = Collaborators' News Network

(Still busily reporting the happy happy news from Havana, while dissidents and escapers are shot just off camera.)

[litany_of_lies]

I just think CNN was greedy and the truth didn't matter.

Maybe. But it's also very clear that CNN is dominated by antiwar appeasement types who hate the US and Israel and are OK with the Palestinians and the American Left.

They also knew, with Clinton taking office, that the last thing Slick Willie wanted was to be maneuvered into having to use American force in a meaningful way, ESPECIALLY after Mogadishu.

Consciously or subsconsciouly, their failure to accurately report events in Iraq helped Bill Clinton kick this can (and the terrorist can) eight years down the road.

It gets worse, IMHO. The New York Times, which had been in the lead on the TWA Flight 800 investigation, suddenly walked away from it and bought the government's lies about mechanical failure, when it's pretty darn clear that it was downed by a missile. NOBODY wanted to find terrorism, because it would have forced Bill Clinton to act, and could have (in 1996) jeopardized his precious reelection.

[antaresequity]

I'll buy that

[Diddley]

CNN – What did CNN know, and when did they know it?
CNN - We bury (articles). You dig.
CNN – Coverup News Network
CNN – All the news that’s fit to hide
CNN - RIP