#CNNFail? Why, Yes.

June 14th, 2009 CNN Foreign Policy Iran Media 26 Comments


('DiggThis’)

Share

Posted in CNN, Foreign Policy, Iran, Media |
«
»
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

26 Responses to “#CNNFail? Why, Yes.”

  1. rikyrah says:
    June 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm

    The American media has shown themselves to be absolutely useless. Useless. I’ve gotten all my info about IRAN online -through foreign news services and blogs.

  2. durablend says:
    June 14, 2009 at 8:25 pm

    Countdown to “Well that’s the librul media for ya” in 3…2…1…

  3. Frank DiSalle says:
    June 14, 2009 at 8:27 pm

    You mean NO ONE has any idea why this might be so?

    May I suggest:

    Were Bush President, how would the unrest in Iran be blamed on him?

    Since Bush is not President, why is this not being blamed on Obama?

    This story will be muffled in the hopes that Iran restores itself to order, because :

    a) It must not look like Obama’s outreach to the Islamic World in Cairo was a waste of time; and

    b) The Press does not want to be a participant in a call to action, that could result in military involvement in Iran.

    In other words, the Press, in the Age of Obama is now in the business not of reporting news, but rather, the business of manipulating what information reaches the public.

    There ought to be a word for that, you know ?

    Like “prop” … “propa” …

    Oh, wait!

  4. Frank DiSalle says:
    June 14, 2009 at 8:29 pm

    sorry end italics
    Since Bush is not President, why is this not being blamed on Obama?

    This story will be muffled in the hopes that Iran restores itself to order, because :

    a) It must not look like Obama’s outreach to the Islamic World in Cairo was a waste of time; and

    b) The Press does not want to be a participant in a call to action, that could result in military involvement in Iran.

    In other words, the Press, in the Age of Obama is now in the business not of reporting news, but rather, the business of manipulating what information reaches the public.

    There ought to be a word for that, you know ?

    Like “prop” … “propa” …

    Oh, wait!

  5. till says:
    June 14, 2009 at 8:47 pm

    Frank, please stop smoking whatever it is that you are smoking.

  6. Quaker in a Basement says:
    June 14, 2009 at 9:53 pm

    This story will be muffled in the hopes that Iran restores itself to order, because :

    a) It must not look like Obama’s outreach to the Islamic World in Cairo was a waste of time; and

    Well that doesn’t make much sense.

    Why would this story make it appear that Mr. Obama’s Cairo speech was wasted? The speech concerned relations between the United States and the entire Islamic world. The uprising in Iran is limited to a single nation, and it’s pro-reform, not anti-American or pro-American.

    If you’re going to spin these yarns, Frank, at least make them plausible, will you?

  7. Vic says:
    June 14, 2009 at 9:59 pm

    But, if MSNBC broadcasted the news on Iran, I would have had to wait until next weekend to find out if life in jail really is horrible.

  8. Luv says:
    June 14, 2009 at 11:05 pm

    Uh, does Mr. DiSalle understand that these revolts are actually FOR progressive change (Obama’s position) and has nothing to do with being anti-American?

    So how can they be “blamed” on Obama. If anything, they should be CREDITED to Obama if one were so inclined.

    Or do I have to explain the difference between blaming and crediting?

  9. hf says:
    June 14, 2009 at 11:05 pm

    Remind me again why our President should have stopped these riots by people opposing the evil Ahmadinajad? (Also, how would military involvement help in a country larger than Iraq, that can’t have less than 30% actually supporting our opponents even before we invade?)

  10. blue says:
    June 15, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    I thought all presidents get a pass for what goes on until September 12th after their election.
    Surely the fact that Iran has the middle east’s most participated in democracy is the greatest Irony (should that be Irany?)

  11. Duros62 says:
    June 15, 2009 at 4:03 pm

    Really none of our business, is it?

    Although, it is good for McCain. To wit;

    Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) condemned the Iranian election as a “sham,” declaring, “I hope that we will act.”

    Whaddya suggest we do, Johnny Thunder?

  12. SFC B says:
    June 15, 2009 at 4:11 pm

    Surely the fact that Iran has the middle east’s most participated in democracy…

    Vote early, vote often!

  13. Rhys says:
    June 15, 2009 at 4:58 pm

    “Vote early, vote often!”

    But only up to 10 times, because that’s how many fingers can be marked with purple ink to stop you voting again before you run out of fingers!

    Oh wait …

    If you had a functioning media in the US, you might know these things.

  14. Colin says:
    June 15, 2009 at 5:24 pm

    Surely the fact that Iran has the middle east’s most participated in democracy is the greatest Irony (should that be Irany?)

    Sure, if you consider a country where a religious Council of Guardians approves the candidates to be a democracy.

  15. Mylegacy says:
    June 15, 2009 at 5:37 pm

    As to the coverage – do you get a station carrying the BBC world news in the US and BBC’s commentary shows about the middle east? If not – you really haven’t a clue what is really going on.

    As to what is going on in Iran now – one thing is CLEAR – the IDEA of Iran as a “democracy” as long as you are a “Bat-Shit Crazy Religious Fanatic Moron” has been exposed BY THE SILENT (NOT SO MUCH ANY LONGER) MAJORITY as being a total SHAM. This COUP against the COUP will be step one in the destroying the whole sick religious mess that is Iran.

    Obama’s message of “yes we can” continues to reverberate around the world. Here in Canada we’ll be having an election early summer or fall – lets hope our “progressives” can crush the Harper government and give the Obama wave another victory!

  16. Why does mainstream media (MSM) suck? | PunditCountry says:
    June 15, 2009 at 9:18 pm

    [...] (h/t Olliver Willis) [...]

  17. Tex Hussein says:
    June 15, 2009 at 11:04 pm

    Mylegacy:

    Thanks for your post. Maybe there’s hope for this world after all. Based on what I’ve read, there’s no clear call on whether the election was really a sham or not. But if the BBC says its a sham, then it’s a sham!

    Isn’t it a shame that we Americans who tout our freedom of the press seem to live in a press-free zone sometimes? Or maybe, given our relationship with the Iranians, it would be in poor taste for us to jump too hard on the Mousavi bandwagon just yet. It might jinx him to have us western monsters give our endorsement.

    Yes we can!

  18. Repack Rider says:
    June 16, 2009 at 12:30 am

    if you consider a country where a religious Council of Guardians approves the candidates to be a democracy.

    We would never negotiate with such a repressive regime. Iran stands in stark contrast with the modern, open society represented by our friends and allies the Saudis, whose national passion for democracy, women’s rights and religious freedom surpasses even our own.

  19. Amused Observer says:
    June 16, 2009 at 12:44 am

    Repack,
    You failed to address his point regarding Iranian democracy.

    But enough of that, what’s your inflation hedge you mentioned the other day?

  20. jrfunkenstein says:
    June 16, 2009 at 12:45 am

    Wow Frank; doubling your post has only doubled the inanity of it.

    Good job Captain Banal.

  21. jrfunkenstein says:
    June 16, 2009 at 12:48 am

    ‘We would never negotiate with such a repressive regime. Iran stands in stark contrast with the modern, open society represented by our friends and allies the Saudis, whose national passion for democracy, women’s rights and religious freedom surpasses even our own.’

    Ouch RR; that is some bang on satire amigo.

  22. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    June 16, 2009 at 2:13 am

    AO: “You failed to address his point regarding Iranian democracy.”

    Actually, he did. You see, the original point is that someone claimed you couldn’t negotiate with Iran because it was repressive, but someone said that they are at the head of the class in the Middle East.

    Note. No one said they were perfect. No one is claiming that.

    So Colin is merely fighting strawmen and RR actually showed that compared to other states in the area, states the Unites States has no issue dealing with, Iran is ahead of the curve. Therefore, if you can deal with Saudi Arabia, you can deal with Iran.

    See?

  23. Colin says:
    June 16, 2009 at 10:18 am

    We would never negotiate with such a repressive regime. Iran stands in stark contrast with the modern, open society represented by our friends and allies the Saudis, whose national passion for democracy, women’s rights and religious freedom surpasses even our own.

    I have no idea what you are trying to say here. I am not sure you do either.

    I don’t think that my point — that Iran isn’t a true democracy — is very controversial.

  24. Colin says:
    June 16, 2009 at 10:20 am

    So Colin is merely fighting strawmen and RR actually showed that compared to other states in the area, states the Unites States has no issue dealing with, Iran is ahead of the curve. Therefore, if you can deal with Saudi Arabia, you can deal with Iran.

    See?

    What strawman did I take down?

    This post seems to be arguing with something I never said, which is par for the course around here. Show me where I said we shouldn’t talk to Iran. Show me where I said anything about US policy towards Iran.

    I pointed out that Iran is not a true democracy. I stand by that.

  25. Zython says:
    June 17, 2009 at 7:36 am

    I have no idea what you are trying to say here. I am not sure you do either.

    Translation: I don’t understand what you said, therefore, you are wrong.

    Ah, pure ultra-con debate tactics, how fascinating.

  26. Colin says:
    June 17, 2009 at 10:12 am

    Translation: I don’t understand what you said, therefore, you are wrong.

    Ah, pure ultra-con debate tactics, how fascinating.

    Since you have decided to inject yourself into this conversation perhaps you can do me a favor and explain how this:

    We would never negotiate with such a repressive regime. Iran stands in stark contrast with the modern, open society represented by our friends and allies the Saudis, whose national passion for democracy, women’s rights and religious freedom surpasses even our own.

    makes sense as a response to this:

    Sure, if you consider a country where a religious Council of Guardians approves the candidates to be a democracy.

Oliver Willis

Contact
Email: owillis@gmail.com
Twitter
Facebook
Flickr
AIM: oliverwill
Huffington Post Columns
Media Matters Blog Entries