General Discussion

MADem

(135,425 posts)

24. I didn't say you said that. Can't I have an opinion on the process?

Mon Jun 15, 2015, 11:03 PM

Jun 2015

In some cases, when there are fights like this, and it's impossible to do any real "investigating" save getting quotes from either side and juxtaposing them, that's about all one can do. Keep a running tally of He said/She said/They said until something shakes out.

If there's any opining happening, I'd rather see the 'opinionators' clearly identified and I'd rather the reporter limit his or hers to stuff approaching "water is wet" POVs. If something is a "DUH" it's fine to finish the piece with it, but any time there's a hint of "lean" it damages credibility. When reporters start putting their hopes and dreams and opinions and leans into stories, we end up with Dan Rather messes. He was a good guy, heart in the right place, long record, stellar career, but he allowed his wishes to overtake his good sense.

The sad irony is that his "facts" were right--but his "evidence" wasn't. He got rope-a-doped. It was a long, slow roll, too.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

103 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Reporter Who Wrote Times 'Snowden' Propaganda Admits He's Just Writing What UK Gov't Told Him [View all] marmar Jun 2015 OP

. AuntPatsy Jun 2015 #1

That bullshit article Aerows Jun 2015 #11

Author of That Horrible Snowden Article Has Even Worse CNN Interview Wilms Jun 2015 #2

That interview was unreal Aerows Jun 2015 #27

Anybody, and I mean anybody, could have just made up that story. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #31

He's not a reporter, he's a scribe CanonRay Jun 2015 #77

MUST WATCH /\ G_j Jun 2015 #62

I really don't want "reporters" to MADem Jun 2015 #3

But in this case, he didn't seek out the other side of the story ...... marmar Jun 2015 #4

I agree--he should have gotten an "opposing view" quote. There's more here, certainly. MADem Jun 2015 #9

No--he shouldn't have gotten an "opposing view" quote truebluegreen Jun 2015 #36

Where did I say anything about giving equal weight? If a reporter goes to one source MADem Jun 2015 #46

I apologize. truebluegreen Jun 2015 #48

We're fine--I like a nice chat! No worries. nt MADem Jun 2015 #55

No, they are supposed to ferret out the truth. Facts are facts in that world. cui bono Jun 2015 #8

Most excellent post! Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #14

Why thank you. cui bono Jun 2015 #43

They aren't supposed to give us their OPINIONS on what "the truth" is. MADem Jun 2015 #16

I never said that. I said they are supposed to get the facts. cui bono Jun 2015 #19

I didn't say you said that. Can't I have an opinion on the process? MADem Jun 2015 #24

Of course you can, but you were responding directly to my post. cui bono Jun 2015 #25

People like to fight here on DU. I'd rather talk about what is happening in the world. MADem Jun 2015 #53

Yes, people do. cui bono Jun 2015 #68

I know. MADem Jun 2015 #69

Cool. cui bono Jun 2015 #71

The original article made no sense. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #32

I think it was a piece of bloody, fatty meat tied to a line and thrown off the back of the boat. MADem Jun 2015 #56

I disagree that they wouldn't fall on their swords Aerows Jun 2015 #60

I don't think the reform is all that much of a surprise, and I thought the timing had more to do MADem Jun 2015 #64

Uh, speaking of SF86's blowing up in people's faces ... Aerows Jun 2015 #65

I agree with that, too. The oversight stunk on ice. There's a lot of entrenched idiocy. MADem Jun 2015 #66

I started a post on it Aerows Jun 2015 #70

I wondered if this was part of the larger problem, as well... MADem Jun 2015 #72

Kind of looks necessary Aerows Jun 2015 #73

They could reissue SSANs. It would be a big job, but not insurmountable. MADem Jun 2015 #74

They are covering something up or someone else in the complex web of private contractors JDPriestly Jun 2015 #78

The Chinese and Russians do it differently than we do--they put their hackers in uniform. MADem Jun 2015 #79

There is just some information that should not be placed on any computer system. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #80

If they KNOW that people are gonna play games and screw around, they should bite the bullet and MADem Jun 2015 #86

I totally agree. There is no excuse for the sloppiness involved in this scandal no matter JDPriestly Jun 2015 #88

Here we go. This is what happened to the personnel information in the US: JDPriestly Jun 2015 #101

Fact checking is fine, too. But it's more of a challenge when you agree to quote a source MADem Jun 2015 #35

Journalism 101: if you have only one unattributed source, Don't Go To Print with it. truebluegreen Jun 2015 #38

That hasn't been the standard for years. I don't think it would be a bad idea to go back to it, MADem Jun 2015 #49

Just because a source says something doesn't make it the truth. cui bono Jun 2015 #41

That is true. Judith Miller, etc. MADem Jun 2015 #51

No shit, end of discussion of who, what, when, where, why and for added value HOW!!! mrdmk Jun 2015 #84

Made me think of this: cui bono Jun 2015 #89

Yep, there is some bullshit happening somewhere! mrdmk Jun 2015 #103

Actually. They should be investigators. What people are saying are not necessarily facts. Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #12

I've no problem with investigative reporting, either. MADem Jun 2015 #17

Oh give it up. You were on the poopy-head band wagon until the reporter revealed himself Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #20

Not at all. As I've said, I think this is a long game. MADem Jun 2015 #37

No offense, MADem Aerows Jun 2015 #21

I definitely served and retired! MADem Jun 2015 #29

It's rather farfetched Aerows Jun 2015 #33

I am not saying that either. MADem Jun 2015 #39

Addendum Aerows Jun 2015 #42

Fair point...and you can add "candidate" to that as well! nt MADem Jun 2015 #47

You certainly can Aerows Jun 2015 #57

To pretend that reporters are objective, impartial and without an agenda is at best naive...nt Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #30

I don't say they are. I say the ones that are worthy of any respect should strive for that ideal. nt MADem Jun 2015 #45

Yeah that is the problem with garbage pundits, that is exactly what they do. Rex Jun 2015 #66

That is one of the most FlatBaroque Jun 2015 #75

Well, your mind is made up and have a nice day. See you in Nov of next year--if you're still here. MADem Jun 2015 #87

Seriously? Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #81

Read the thread. I didn't say that. In fact, I said the opposite. MADem Jun 2015 #85

I responded to what you wrote. If you managed to backtrack and revise that nonsense so what? Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #93

Don't you dare read the full conversation... MADem Jun 2015 #94

Provable falsehoods are not a side, imo Babel_17 Jun 2015 #92

Please read the full conversation, which took place a day before you decided to chime in. MADem Jun 2015 #95

Please don't make assumptions (and I'm not wild about the "chime in" dig) Babel_17 Jun 2015 #96

I knew someone would be here to stick up for shitty reporting and sloppy propaganda. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2015 #98

Really? Tuesday? MADem Jun 2015 #99

No idea what you're talking about, but my question was strictly a courtesy--no hidden meaning. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2015 #100

Correct. Someone who simply hands readers what the government handed him or her is merrily Jun 2015 #5

They are a mouthpiece Aerows Jun 2015 #18

And now, we have a law that says our government can propagandize us. Considering networks were merrily Jun 2015 #23

It's no secret "Media" all around the world Alittleliberal Jun 2015 #50

Stenographers. NewSystemNeeded Jun 2015 #6

LMAO! Aerows Jun 2015 #7

This is good for a larf.. frylock Jun 2015 #10

First thing that came to mind when I saw that interview. Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #13

If you look at who rec'd it Aerows Jun 2015 #44

I know Aerows Jun 2015 #15

LMAO 840high Jun 2015 #34

I knew exactly! what post that was without even looking. truebluegreen Jun 2015 #40

so did I! nt m-lekktor Jun 2015 #61

That's pretty damn funny Doctor_J Jun 2015 #54

Classic! The "epitome of the genre". Zorra Jun 2015 #102

See up thread, "reporters should be stenographers". Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #82

Now where is everyone who started screeching SNOWDEN TRAITOR(TM)!!! all over again? daredtowork Jun 2015 #22

Not gullible schmucks Aerows Jun 2015 #26

Let me join you Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #58

That was pretty obvious. Another mindless tool posing as a 'reporter'. sabrina 1 Jun 2015 #28

He did his job Man from Pickens Jun 2015 #52

"I vas just following orders." Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2015 #59

The Sunday Times sends DMCA notice to critics of Snowden hacking story Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #63

Sick and lazy reporting. Baitball Blogger Jun 2015 #76

Shouldn't we all trust our government? See GWB and IWR for solution to quiz. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2015 #83

Oh, so now DU has gone back to hating anon gov't sources again?? Blue_Tires Jun 2015 #90

Stenography was his minor, and he aced it (nt) Babel_17 Jun 2015 #91

Recommend...saw an interview with him...sheesh..... KoKo Jun 2015 #97