The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label False report. Show all posts
Showing posts with label False report. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

CBS Starts Process Of Coming Clean On Lara Logan and Dylan Davies Benghazi Report

After waiting just over one week in anticipation of how CBS would handle its role in the most recent foray into Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS), the network has stepped up. We thought sharing a couple of reader comments from Media Matters's would add flavor to CBS' grievous misguided following Fox News down a path of misinformation.
I expected different from CBS. I guess the Foxification of the other networks continues, CNN is already Fox Lite, and right-wing ditwit Jonathan Karl is White House reporter for ABC. 

It certainly won't with me, not that it counts for a lot with the CBS brass. 60 Minutes used to be the crown jewel of television reporting, now they bring on some loser who falsified his story and then give the clown a book deal under a CBS subsidiary. Lara Logan then quips, oopsie! that was an "err" not to report that we are basically paying the guy for the story - a story that has been proven to be a lie.

How the mighty have fallen. Sad.
Doesn't CBS know the "Gather em, Record em, and Broadcast em" path is the exclusive domain of Fox News? Some Media Matters readers are calling Fox led ODS: Foxification.  We think it very apropos. Networks are vying for ratings via 'red meat' stories which resemble the Fox News Model current event/propaganda information model.

Does the addition of Lara Logan to the 60 Minutes Team mean it has (in some way) lowered its journalistic standards? Since, we know on-air personalities have producers and broadcast writers, where are the 60 Minutes team members who seek to verify and re-verify stories. Yes, the Dylan Davies episode reminds of Ruppert Murdoch new operations.

Here is a snippet of the previously referenced Media Matters piece.
The controversy stems from the October 27 edition of CBS' 60 Minutes, in which Davies, who used the alias Morgan Jones, claimed to be an "eyewitness" of the September 2012 attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya. He claimed that during the attack he entered the compound, confronted an attacker, and later went to a Benghazi hospital where he claimed to have seen Ambassador Chris Stevens' body -- a story that, according to The Washington Post, did not match the account in an incident report he gave in which he said he "could not get anywhere near" the compound the night of the attack.
After the revelations from the Post, Media Matters chairman David Brock called on CBS to retract its report. Many veteran journalists and media ethicists criticized 60 Minutes' reporting. Facts also emerged about the connection between CBS and Davies' repeated attempts to "profit off his brush with disaster," according to Foreign Policy magazine: 
Jones has other ways of cashing in as well. This week, his book titled The Embassy House was published by Threshold Editions, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, which is a part of CBS Corporation, which owns 60 Minutes -- a fact not disclosed in the 60 Minutes story. His book is also going to make it on the silver screen. In October, Thunder Road acquired The Embassy House for a feature on the Benghazi attack produced by Basil Iwanyk and executive produced by Taylor Sheridan. 
Despite admitting error in failing to inform viewers on the financial conflict, CBS still "aggressively defended the report's accuracy," including Davies' account of the attacks, according to the Times. What's more, Logan, who interviewed Davies for 60 Minutes, blamed "intense political warfare" for the criticism of her report and claimed that, despite the fact that he admitted he lied in at least one of his accounts of the attacks, Davies "never had two stories. He only had one story." Logan failed to specifically address any of the problems with the report.
Read much more, here.

Comments posed above are "point-on." As a nation we are possibly seeing the impact of high ratings (Fox News evening shows) as a 360 degree symbiotic relation with people who love "red meat." People who respond to surveys that included a question about armed revolution (Sean Hannitys website) despite the fact the question may have embodied a form of sedition. Viewers who apparently welcome O'Reilly's and Hannity's crass shouting at guest and unprofessional name calling. Without a doubt, Fox appeals to "non information" ODS people, who feed off stories that are are either, fabricated, twisted for impact, or misleading. Should we expect long-standing credible media to join the quest for viewers (revenues) to the point of rushing to broadcast at the expense of journalistic commonly accepted standards? If we accept such, recent examples from ABC (1, 2), CBS, NBC and associated affiliates we must also accept the networks are turning their corporate mission\s and focus to revenue driven propaganda.