John Moser is right on Eason Jordan of CNN’s op-ed, but there is more to it as I implied the other day. Glenn Reynolds says it most clearly: "Maybe, you know, it’s not worth the moral compromises involved in reporting from a dictator’s capital, if you’re not able to tell the truth." See the whole of it here. We know that this sort of thing has happened in the past, especially with regard to reporting from the USSR, and it always amazed me that no one in the press talked about it publicly. Shame on them.
"Maybe, you know, it’s not worth the moral compromises involved in reporting from a dictator’s capital, if you’re not able to tell the truth."-Amen!
Reason number "1" I dislike the UN: Maybe it is not worth the moral compromise involved in disputing with a dictator’s mouthpiece the fate of the world.
In my view at least some of the argument for the UN is based upon the same faulty view of "objectivity", which has plagued the European/ American press.
"Theoretical" Work being done on the possibility/preconditions for conversation is of the upmost importance. Lets not leave it to the Germans. I guess conservatives can know when to "wink", but longterm as ideas infiltrate the culture and have an influence this strikes me as very serious. I worry that a time will come when the policy of winking will come back and bite us in the ass.
OpinionJournal.com ran an article critical of CNN and Jordan’s Op/Ed.Enter text description