The predictable major media reverberations have begun in reaction to the resignation of CNN's Eason Jordan. The bloggers who challenged Jordan to a) insist on the release of the video of his remarks at Davos and/or b) put forth evidence of his charges that the U.S. military targeted and killed journalists in Iraq, are themselves being accused of unaccountability and "lynch mob" tactics. And those are the nice things being said about them.
Members of the left, including certain liberal bloggers and Democratic members of Congress, Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd, who were present when the remarks were made and have also spoken out in opposition to them, are apparently excused from the lynch mob accusations. They are inconvenient to the righteous fury of the hard-left.
I'll defer to the people who have been covering the story from the outset to bring you the MSM reaction to it, after just a couple of observations. First, observe the scramble to put the focus on the messenger rather than the message. I heard Bob Zelnick on Fox News this evening make the statement that blaming bloggers for what happened to Eason Jordan is analogous to complaining that a burglar was caught by an alert citizen instead of by the police.
It's embarrassing to have to report a story as important as the resignation of the head of CNN News, when you must admit that you considered the story that caused the resignation to be less than newsworthy for a week or so. So it must be the bloggers' fault. And whatever Jordan said he didn't deserve to be fired. (Depending on what suits their spin, he either "resigned" in a noble gesture to save the network from further embarrassment, or he was "lynched" by bloggers. Or both.) My suspicion is that CNN executives saw the video and didn't want anyone else to.
I would then just note the ongoing irony that the same people who most loudly lament the declining image of the United States in the world, are those who are working hardest to present the most negative picture of our country, our military and our leadership, often through the use of the worst kinds of distortions and slanders. Hey, whatever gets you the approving nods and murmurs from the Europeans and Arabs at Davos.
But back to the "salivating morons" and "bible-thumping knuckledraggers" of the right side of the blogosphere who somehow forced CNN to pull the trigger on Eason Jordan.
Michelle Malkin has some of the reaction in her piece in today's NY Post online. And it is simply not possible to get any better or more thorough, link-rich roundup posts than what Michelle puts together.
Ed Morrissey of Captains Quarters was interviewed for today's New York Times article on the blogs' effect on the resignation, and thinks he was treated fairly, and that the piece was pretty balanced. He does take issue with the fact that most major media, including the Times, have completely ignored Jordan's previous, and equally unsubstantiated statements on the targeting of journalists by U.S. troops. Read Ed's whole post here.
Check out also Andrew McCarthy at NRO commenting on the WSJ's treatment of the reporting on the scandal, and Power Line's look back at Eason Jordan's previous slanders of the U.S. military.
Get through that stuff and you'll be up to speed.
Posted by dan at February 14, 2005 10:50 PMI heart Michelle Malkin. This is another one of the shocking - yet by now shouldn't be shocking instances where I am confronted with the disparity between the standards I thought everyone walked around demanding (esp in positions of authority and persuasion) and the actuality of moral bankruptcy as the status quo. Why do we need a team of bloggers to demand proof behind inflamatory anti-military comments made at international caucuses? Thank God we do, but Jordan should have had that standards and morals stuff that keep him from spouting his opinions and theories as fact when he knows his words carry weight! Shame on you, Jordan. Then, sadly, half the world agrees that there is nothing wrong with deciding the news to fit your agenda and bias (almost forgivable because everyone has one) and even unsubstantiated facts are acceptable. It's one of those moments when you look over your shoulder to see if anyone else saw what just happened because it defies what you considered reality to be. Chris Rock (the comedian, Dad) commented on this very decline in moral standards in America today. The moral obligations have gotten so low that actions that any sane person would assume to be give-ins, people boast about for recognition. I paraphrase: A man says "Well, I take care of my kids." What you want? A cookie? " or "I ain't never been to jail" You ain't SUPPOSED to go to jail you low expectation-having- mother f*ck*r" etc.
I feel the NRO article chimed in with Chris Rock in my head. How abhorrible is it that the new threshold for journalistic integrity has to be the most horrendous example we can recall? I suppose Jordan's defenders cheer something like "It wasn't like he forged documents about it" Well, congratulations. You low-expectation-having mother f*ck*r.
Posted by: SUE at February 15, 2005 12:49 PM