CNN's chief news executive Eason Jordan resigned this evening.

First Dan Rather. Now Jordan. Both taken down by bloggers.

The old truism "Don't pick a fight with anyone who buys ink by the barrel" is no longer true.

And they took down James J.D. Guckert AKA Jeff Gannon, who was given daily passes to White House press briefings even though he belonged to a fake news agency and was a plant from the GOP, assigned to ask softball questions to the president.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6947877/

snicker.

Yeah...same thing. Somebody nobody heard of is comparable to the top guys at CBS and CNN news.

CBS, NBC, PBS and ABC have been Democratic party "plants" for years. That doesn't bother you, does it?

Except when their very top guys get taking down for lying of course

Bullshit. Dan Rather is not a DNC plant.

The fact that someone was given access to the president under a false name, working for a false news agency, giving false quotations and propaganda is very disturbing. It is unrealistic to think the White House did not know who he was.

Bush the Bubble Boy can't handle reality.

I wonder why there's no link in the topic post?

Is it disrespect? Sloth? Or simply the fact that the two stories don't compare?

Associated Press. "CNN News Executive Eason Quits". LATimes.com. February 11, 2005. See http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-021104cnn_lat,0,7789841.story

Karmashock...cool huh? Now we need to see that videotape of Eason.

Must be pretty bad.

Wonder how much CNN had to pay to buy it and burn it.

:D

Muhlenberg

Do tell us how'd u get the info that the CNN exec was fired for "political" reasons, or should I call you Mrs.Rice?

Allright, Jeff Gannon, the heartthrob of closeted conservatives!
http://www.bartcop.com/ho-gannon.jpg

Yes I heard he managed some porno websites...is this true?

The discoveries, made by both diarists at Daily Kos, Duncan Black of Atrios and John Aravosis of AmericaBLOG, trace a curious and sometimes confusing path to J.D. Guckert, the reporter who was writing under a pseudonym of Jeff Gannon.

Gannon was a reporter for Talon News, a conservative news site which some see as a propaganda outlet. Gannon resigned his post early this morning after these discoveries surfaced.

Diarists at Daily Kos discovered that JeffGannon.com and a handful of gay military sites, were registered by the same company by J. Daniels, possibly another pseudonym. Those sites included Conservativeguy.com, Conservative-guy.com, Conservativelegal.com, Exposejessejackson.com Jeffgannon.com, Theconservativeguy.com, Theconservativelegal.com, The-conservative-guy.com
conservative-guy.com, Hotmilitarystud.com, Militaryescorts.com and Militaryescortsm4m.com.

Since this connection was reported, the site’s ownership has been masked, but screenshots are available here. The company that registered the names is Bedrock Corp.

Perhaps more striking, however, was the revelation that Guckert had posted a scantily clad photograph of himself online on his AOL profile. No absolute link has shown the photograph is of Gannon himself, though there are strong indications Guckert and Gannon are the same man.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=47

I think he proves me assertion that many of those conservatives are really quite gay...

Repo Man...snicker.

That the party line? A nobody is "just like" the top CNN news executive quitting after he got caught, apparently, telling world economic leaders (including many Arabs) that the U.S. military murders journalists?

And you wonder when you keep losing elections.

Thousands of bloggers are popping champagne corks and filing another notch in the side of their monitor tonight.

And what are liberals doing?

Whining.

It's not fair! Somebody nobody cares about from some net news source few read did something bad too!

Hey...and what is this about mocking gays? Isn't that 'homophobia'? Isn't that 'hate speech'? I thought all liberals love gays. And it is his "private life". Right?

Barf…Muhlenberg

Maybe instead of going around the issue maybe you can tell me where you got the information that the CNN exec was fired for political reasons, from a blogger?

And you wonder when you keep losing elections.

People liars like you vote…and are increasing in number. There is little Democrats can do against that.

Thousands of bloggers are popping champagne corks and filing another notch in the side of their monitor tonight.

Whacking off to Mr.Gannon I suppose?

And what are liberals doing?

Laughing…

Hey...and what is this about mocking gays? Isn't that 'homophobia'? Isn't that 'hate speech'? I thought all liberals love gays. And it is his "private life". Right?

No one here was mocking gays, Mr. Gannon asked for it, considering he has a family he has a lot of answering to do. Mr.Gannon only proves what I wrote in my thread true about homosexuals:

Typically, gays-to-be simply find themselves having homosexual encounters and yet at least initially resisting quite strongly the identification of being homosexual. Such a person even very likely resists having such encounters but ends up having them anyway.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=44862

The archetype self-hating homosexual, or conservative conversely.

The problem with liberals is the steering wheel...the DNC goes further left while Queen Hilary, the hope of the liberals, goes further right...oh my, which way to go today! Who knows? Who cares?

oh my, which way to go today!

Ask Mr.Gannon he knows how's it like to be one confused little boy.

Undecided...Why is this political?

Aside from the fact that all lefties say "Everything is political" how about Jordan admitting CNN covered up Saddam's atrocities because CNN didn't want it's staff to have trouble with Saddam?

So first Jordan doesn't report on murders which did happen. Then Jordan reports on murders which didn't happen. Then, under political heat, CNN tells him to get lost. Then the left starts whining and everyone else cheers.

Nah..nothing "political" about this at all.

It was all an honest mistake.

tee...hee...

Undecided...Why is this political?

Why else would you put in a politics forum? Also by implication:

First Dan Rather. Now Jordan. Both taken down by bloggers.

That Eason was brought down by a intrepid conservative blogger, I asked show me where and why. Two things you refuse to do, and as long as u do I will bug you for it unless you admit you’re a lying scumbag like Mr.Gannon.

Aside from the fact that all lefties say "Everything is political" how about Jordan admitting CNN covered up Saddam's atrocities because CNN didn't want it's staff to have trouble with Saddam?

Let’s not compare an apple and an orange, why did you lie?

Nah..nothing "political" about this at all.

Well it may be political indeed, but in antoehr thread, maybe you can be “logical” and try not to change the conversation…why did you lie?

It was all an honest mistake.

I bet Gannon is saying that tonight to his wife…maybe you can give him pointers on how to lie ineffectively.

So the absence of a response is enough for me to know you are indeed a lying scumbag like the rest...thank you.

I would let it go, Undecided. He's not here for sincere debate, as evidenced by his distorted assertions of fact and lack of source material to validate.

Oh I did let it go, he didn't answer that's enough for me.

tiassa ..He's not here for sincere debate, as evidenced by his distorted assertions of fact and lack of source material to validate.

What do you consider sincere debate? Spamming a thread about the top news exec at CNN with off-topic rants about Gannon? Posting a homosexual poster? (scroll back if anyone hasn't seen it).

The Davos/CNN scandal has been all over the net for days. Yet you want me to post links to "prove" this is correct? Don't know how to do a google news search (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&client=googlet&q=Eason+Jordan&btnG=Search)? Don't know how to search google for what bloggers have been reporting (http://www.google.com/search?q=Eason+Jordan+blogger+Davos&btnG=Search&hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&client=googlet) for days?

If not, you can turn on the radio.Jordan's resignation is mentioned every news break.

You are the one who is insincere. You know all about some guy at Talon News few people in the country every heard of yet you pretend to know nothing about Eason Jordan and Rony Abovitz ( [url=http://www.google.com/search?client=googlet&q=Rony%20Abovitz)--the blogger who brought Jordan down.

Rony Abovitz (http://www.google.com/search?client=googlet&q=Rony%20Abovitz)

I wonder why there's no link in the topic post?

Is it disrespect? Sloth? Or simply the fact that the two stories don't compare?

Associated Press. "CNN News Executive Eason Quits". LATimes.com. February 11, 2005. See http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-021104cnn_lat,0,7789841.story
they do compare. Both of these big media guys were brought down by blogs.

This is the new media revolution.

Karmashock...how can anyone not applaud this? We are going back to when sermons and broadsheets sparked the American Revolution and when serious debate such as the Federalists papers was expected.

Blogs are taking down big shot liberals right now. I like that but don't care who they take down.

Those that found elite media domination comforting will feel threatened by these actions.


To those that did so, that time has passed. If you want the elitist message to be maintained, then I suggest your remake it in the anarchy of the net. The old paradigm is doomed.

Both of these big media guys were brought down by blogs

Yes, and both Ted Bundy and I have been arrested by police officers before.

I just don't think either corellation is particularly significant.

In fact, if we look at recently-controversial journalists:

• Armstrong Williams: Never thought of himself as a journalist; thought as a businessman when he accepted the propaganda contract.
• Maggie Gallagher: Did not consider paid contract with government significant enough to disclose as potential conflict of interest.
• Dan Rather: Participated in scandalously-inappropriate news story.
• Jeff Gannon: Accused of softballing president with specific intent of disrupting hard questions.
• Eason Jordan: Either spoke without care, or blew his facts out the ass.

That bloggers took down Rather and Jordan is only as significant as the accusation that bloggers are being too hard on Jeff Gannon, as explained by the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz. (See CNN.com (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0502/09/wbr.01.html).) The blogging revolution is as reckless as it is valuable, as demonstrated by the blog-blitz of this last presidential cycle.

The trick is knowing which is which, and that could take a lot of steam out of this so-called "revolution".

tiassa...Still flogging the Clinton excuse of "Somebody else does it to? OK. Let's compare and contrast the somebody elses:

Williams and Gallagher got paid for pushing the party line. Wow.

Bill Moyers took taxpayer money to push the Democratic party line for decades and became a multimillionaire . PBS was created to sell the Great Society. NPR is a Democratic Party propaganda organ. Tim Russert worked for Tip O'Neil. Chris Matthews worked for Jimmy Carter. George Stephanopoulos worked for Clinton. But as soon as they were hired by the networks, they cut all ties to the Democratic party. Everyone knows that.


Jeff Gannon: Accused of soft balling president with specific intent of disrupting hard questions

Unlike Helen Thomas.

Dan Rather has been tougher on every Republican than he was when interviewing Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussain . 60 Minutes saved Clinton in 1992 with its fuzzy focus Bill and Hillary interview.

Dan Rather: Participated in scandalously-inappropriate news story.

Yes, I would say passing off fake documents as real is "inappropriate". How could it happen? Dan's producer Mary Mapes spent five years researching the story. Kinda odd Rather and Mapes just happened to find fake documents right before the election, though, don't you think?

Yes indeedy-doo. Gannon, Williams and Gallagher (who?) are certainly comparable to all the above. Everybody does do it.

snicker....

Yes, and both Ted Bundy and I have been arrested by police officers before.
I'm talking about something new, not something old. I'm talking about new trends, not expected customs and jobs.


The shear fact that you're comparing something that is new and revolutionary to something old and expected demonstrats how profound this is.


Imagine a world without police as the world was once without bloggers.


Now introduce police as the world as bloggers have been introduced to the world.


Now perhaps thousands of years after the police have been doing their job they're not worth commenting on, but at first they are. In either case, as introduced they revolutionize society/media.


That the bloggers are upsetting the old media heriarchy is beyond question. It's obvious.

In time, they will have established themselves and they won't be news anymore... they'll just be a constant and expected force. The watch dog that the media hasn't been for some time.


Love and Peace, Karmashock.

Haha, OMG, that's some funny shit about Gannon, I never heard about that till now.

As for the "blog revolution", I'm all for them exposing corrupt people, but as Tiassa said, it's as reckless as it is valuable. So long as the info is legit and isn't all lies, then I'm all for it, otherwise they wind up no better than the regular media outlets.

- N

Haha, OMG, that's some funny shit about Gannon, I never heard about that till now.

As for the "blog revolution", I'm all for them exposing corrupt people, but as Tiassa said, it's as reckless as it is valuable. So long as the info is legit and isn't all lies, then I'm all for it, otherwise they wind up no better than the regular media outlets.

- N
I agree... though it should be noted that the conventional media has just as many liars in it. :rolleyes:

Jordan wasn't fired, and he didn't have to quit, but he didn't want to taint CNN with his inaccurate statements (which he backpedaled on immediately at the event), that means he is principled, something the GOP would do well to imitate. I'd like to see Condi quit for her lying.