diy@sb6.UUCP (10/27/83)
With the recent events in Grenada I'm paying particular attention to the coverage given by the media. From what I've been able to understand so far, the press has not been allowed on Grenada, and they were denied permission to accompany the landing forces. Needless to say they're howling about freedom of the press. According to Caspar, it was "too dangerous" forthem. Of course they responded right away that it's not as dangerous as Lebanon or Central America or Viet Nam, so so much for his flimsy excuse. But it makes it pretty obviuos that there's more to the story than we've been told. A friend of mine suggested that they weren't told of the events because it would have been on the 6:00 news first. In other words: CBS/NBC/ABC has learned that tomorrow morning the US will invade Grenada. Several hundred paratroopers will land at ... I have to really wonder if this could happen. Goodness knows I've laughed whenever I hear about a *secret* report or meeting, and the correspondent then gives full details of what went on, often minutes after the meeting or the document was typed. don't get me wrong, I'm glad for some of the things that the media has turned up. But I'm worried about the Watergate Mentality, so to speak, where there's *dirt* somewhere, let's dig it up! And I wonder if anyone can say if the is *not* anti-Reagan!!! I'm a little worried about reliable sources! I work for a good company and I'm fired. I'm pissed, so I tell a reporter that the president of my company has some stock holdings that might be interesting to the public if explored. The holdings may be legit, but by the time they are found to be so, my poor boss has had to answer to news articles about the holdings. How many of you out there read an article about somebody under "investigation" or "suspicion" and not somewhere in your mind figure out he/she's probably guilty? Do you think the DeLorean trial has been jeopardized by the showing of the FBI videotape? I mean, here's the guy with the goods right there in black and white! Why waste my money on a trial, he's guilty! Right!?!? Lord Knows I don't care for Reagan, but I honestly do not believe the Washington Press Corps is being fair. I feel the media should just give facts, but leave out the subjective questioning... Reporter to Soldier in Middle East: "You want to go home, don't you?" Does anyone agree or disagree with that. I would love to be wrong, and if someone can convince me I'll be relieved. I'm listening with an open mind, and I'm interested in how the press is going to respond to their being kept in the dark about Grenada. Again, I'm not knocking Freedom of the Press. I just don't like picking up my paper and figuring out what side of an issue it's on *BEFORE* I get to the ediorial page. dennis
bprice@bmcg.UUCP (11/19/83)
> "Objective Journalism" is a myth.
You know that, and I know that. But why oh why do the tv newsmoguls keep
telling us "And that's the way it is."? It seems that the only people who
don't know that that myth is a myth are the people involved in producing and
consuming TV news. I find it frightening.
--
--Bill Price uucp: {decvax!ucbvax philabs}!sdcsvax!bmcg!bprice
arpa:? sdcsvax!bmcg!bprice@nosc