Is CNN behaving duplicitously?

For the past twelve hours, CNN US' website has run the headline "US troops in snipers' line of fire", and claims Islamist terrorists "call for" their own PR campaign to influence the American public.
On CNN's international edition, the headline reads "Is it time to abort Iraq mission?".

Is it just me, or is that quite dubious? They talk about the Islamists wanting to run a PR campaign when CNN is in fact obviously showing a propaganda video. There is a PR campaign, and it's happening on CNN. Fox fans might perhaps call that "aiding and abetting the enemy".
CNN is offering free publicity to these people at the same time as it runs an op-ed type piece on its international front page with the same agenda as the Islamists: American withdrawal.
Differences between the US and international editions are quite common, but I get the impression that the international headline is just a preview of what the US version will display once CNN deems the American public to be ready for its message.

I back an Iraq pull out because it's a no-win scenario, but this kind of media behaviour strikes me as manipulative. Thoughts?
CNN admitted they covered up or ignored many stories they should have reported before the invasion because they wanted to have access to Iraq and Saddam....they have undermined any claim to be truthful and unbiased by their actions which is why their audience share is dropping like a balloon.....lots of stuff on the US blogs about them.

Mr Happy

CNN is not a good news company, I had the pleasure of sitting with one of its Asian-Indian/American producers for 8 hours on a flight one time in 2003 and we talked about story choices and so forth and it was quite clear that he was unhappy with the organisations political slant on things, its skipping events in preference to others following nothing more than the duty station/channel manager and their agenda. He also acknowledged that CNN (US) has so few intl stories UNLESS they touch on American's as to not be worth watching compared to competitors.

But he thought Dicky Quest was a right-on chap. And I've met Questy and he's right.

And for your amusement:

Web's Increasingly Worldly Flavor Threatens Americans' Worldview

PULLMAN, WASH. ( — The profusion of international news available on the Internet has made it increasingly difficult for the average American to ignore the rest of the world, a trend researchers say threatens Americans' long, proud history of disregarding anything not about them.

"With all the foreign newspapers and multi-cultural sites, the Internet is making it almost impossible for the average American to remain uninformed and apathetic," said Samantha Lessborn of Washington State University, which conducted the survey. "Americans can still do it. But it now takes effort, whereas before it was as easy as turning off Tom Brokaw whenever he said 'In South Korea today...'"

According to survey participant Danny Grisham, a 22-year-old from Cheyenne, Wyoming, it's not just the plethora of international news on the Web that is irritating. "Look, I can get around the news. I just turn off Reuters headlines in MyYahoo," he said. "But even some of the search sites like Yahoo and Alta Vista are available in different languages. Like everybody in the world doesn't speak English. Yeah, right."

"I can see where it's important if we're, like, beating some country in the Olympics or bombing them or, ideally, both," Grisham added. "But if some Colombian drug lord sinks a ferry full of Israeli soldiers in North Latvoania or Serbo-Malaysia, or wherever, and Americans aren't involved, what has that got to do with me?"

Other respondents said they were appalled, not just by the availability of non-U.S. news, but by the way important U.S. news is reported by some of these foreign sites. "Yesterday, for instance, the St. Louis Rams beat the Atlanta Falcons, OK, and I go to the London Times site and it's not even there," said Chip Pernadge of Kansas City, Mo. "Jesus, no wonder those guys lost the war and had to give Hong Kong back to Canada."

Sensing a market opportunity, Net Nanny, makers of Net Nanny filtering software, announced this week it will introduce NetNarrow, an English-only product that automatically filters out content that appears to be international. Specifically, the software looks for world datelines and keywords indicative of irrelevant foreign stories, including "Shiite," "post-Apartheid," and "Bob Geldof."

Survey-taker Craig Barker of Brooklyn, New York, said he will be among the first to get NetNarrow. "On the Web, there are so many ways to get news from so many different places, I could really get some fresh insights into what's going on in other countries if I wanted to," he said.. "But I don't want to."

"You'd think these Internet people would know that," Barker added. "I mean, that's why the Internet is called America Online, right? It's supposed to be about America."

Editor's Note: It seems that after reading this entirely fictional story, some investors/customers of Net Nanny believed the company actually was going to produce NetNarrow software. As a result, Net Nanny asked SatireWire to please assure people that this is not the case. No, really.
CNN is certainly not the best news outlet out there mostly because of their obssesion on the negative.It's chief rival FoxNews is however IMHO even worse mainly because of it's "rosy coloured glasses" way of looking at things and it's penchant to espouse the establishment point of view at the expense of objectivity.

That said while I don't particularly feel comfortable with the publication of these sniper tapes, I also realise that burying the truth in the sand will not make things better.I saw the feature CNN did last night and as shocking as it might be to the average American, a quick search on google will reveal even more gory stuff that goes as far as showing impact.I also understand that these videos are common occurence in MidEast satellite stations.

In a related note the president has for the first time drawn a direct comparison between Iraq and Vietnam.

The Tet Offensive, although a decisive military victory for the US,marked a turning point in American public opinion. A basic knowledge of war tells me, in a democracy the army is no more than the military wing of the population.Winning without public support is extremely hard,even impossible.

That's why I wish CNN would have sat on the story instead of trying a ratings push.Shame on them.

Similar threads

Latest Threads