# CNN's Spiking of Iraqi Atrocities-A Fair Price To Pay? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 12, 2003, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165 "2003-04-12T01:48:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![JohnBckWLD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d6d6ee/32.png) [@JohnBckWLD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnBckWLD)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/1 "2003-04-12T01:48:39Z")
Not that the regime in Baghdad is “out of power”, Eason Jordan, CNN’s President of International Reporting has admitted on today’s [NY Times Edirorial Page](http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html) that CNN kept quiet about **“awful things that could not be reported”** using a rather lame alibi that **"doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff."** In his own words, Mr. Jordan knew, but refused to report [ul][li]The beating and torture of an Iraqi cameraman for a period of weeks because he refused to confirm his government’s suspicion that CNN was in bed with the CIA.[/li][li]This disappearance reporters, some of whom later resurfaced to tell of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways.[/li][li]Uday Hussein told him personally he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected in 1995.[/li][li]Knowlege that the Iraqi secret police brutalized officials to the point of ripping out thier teeth with pliers[/li][li]Armed Iraqi attacks in the Kurdish north[/ul][/li]Even though not reporting on stories you know to be true is not exactly a lie, and conceding the fact the freedom of the press extends to the content chosen (or not chosen) to be aired: [ol][li]Hasn’t CNN lost credibility while paying the price for its Baghdad bureau in human blood?[/li][li]In the name of protecting the lives of employees, did you willingly sacrifice the blood of others?[/li][li]What other stories has CNN squelched and what other atrocities have been cover-up in places like Cuba, North Korea, the Mideast and the Sub-Continent in the name of providing live reports and keeping a bureau open?[/li][li]If CNN was ordered out of Iraq in October 2002, why did you continue to remain silent for another 6 months?[/li][li]Couldn’t you have secretly forwarded the information you had to the UN, Amnesty International, et al?[/li][li]Instead of coming out now to to your subordinates on your own network to ease your guilt, shouldn’t you consider retirement? Maybe you could give lectures on at the Columbia School of Journalism.[/ol][/li]I’m quite certain had a more ethical person been in Mr. Jordan’s position, alot more people would have known alot more about Iraq’s Ba’athist Regime a whole lot sooner. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/2 "2003-04-12T03:15:05Z")
I don’t remember issuing any instructions to the Entertainment industry, of which CNN is a part, to “tell me everything”. They’re in the Entertainment business; they’re selling a product. It’s a judgement call on their part to decide exactly what kind of “product” their consumers will go for, and how much of it. Ethics are lovely, but bottom line, it’s about ratings, and ultimately CNN made a “ratings” and “profit” decision, not an “ethics” decision. And there’s a difference between “covering up” a story, and “not reporting” a story. There have been plenty of atrocity stories worldwide that CNN has given scant attention to (Rwanda, for one), but nobody’s accusing them of a Rwandan atrocity coverup, just of narrowly interpreting their American market to be “not interested” in Rwanda. As for reporting it all to the UNHRC or AI–don’t you think they already knew? Maybe not specific incidents, but they were certainly all aware of the broad trend of human rights violations in Iraq, by Uday and others. Here’s Amnesty International’s 2001 report. Looks like the same-old-same-old. CNN wouldn’t have been telling them anything they didn’t know. [http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/webmepcountries/IRAQ?OpenDocument](http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/webmepcountries/IRAQ?OpenDocument) And, actually, the “we kept our mouths shut so our Iraqi staffers wouldn’t be killed” reasoning works for me. > [@](#): > > \*\*I’m quite certain had a more ethical person been in Mr. Jordan’s position, alot more people would have known alot more about Iraq’s Ba’athist Regime a whole lot sooner. \*\*Erm, it was my understanding that people have “known about” the Ba’athist Regime practically since Day One. [http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/crimes/](http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/crimes/) > [@](#): > > President of Iraq since 1979 (Vice President from 1968-79). Dictator who stops at nothing to preserve personal power and regime survival. After the 1968 Ba’athist Coup, began his career as Chief of Iraq’s security services. > > Executed opponents and suspected potential rivals, including scores of high-level government officials and thousands of political prisoners. > > Since the 1970s, escalated and made routine the systematic torture and execution of political prisoners. > > Ordered the use of chemical weapons against Iranian forces in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, and against Iraq’s Kurdish population in 1988. The 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war left 150,000 to 340,000 Iraqis and 450,000 to 730,000 Iranians dead. > > Ordered the invasion and destruction of Kuwait in 1990-91 with 1,000 Kuwaitis killed. > > Directed the 1991 bloody suppression of Kurdish and Shi’a insurgencies in northern and southern Iraq with at least 30,000 to 60,000 killed. > > Ordered the destruction of southern marshes to extinguish the Shi’a insurgency. Eason Jordan wouldn’t have been telling the State Department anything they didn’t already know, and had known since the 1970s. ---
**Author:** ![Monster104](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Monster104](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monster104)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/3 "2003-04-12T03:40:16Z")
If you needed those particular incidents of brutality that CNN didn’t report to know that Saddam’s regime was oppressive and murderous, you must have been living under a rock. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/4 "2003-04-12T04:19:41Z")
Nonetheless… They are selectively reporting things. That skews reality. It’s _bias_. How would you feel if a news channel funded by the tobacco industry was selectively witholding information regarding the dangers of tobacco smoke? There was a very important debate about the morality of a coming war raging through the world last year. It was a very important issue. Of world-shaking implications. CNN had data to present, which it chose to withold. It doesn’t matter that it was a news organization, even. If a private business stumbled across evidence of atrocities while doing business in Iraq, I would expect them to go public with the information, so we the citizens of the world can make better decisions regaring our own safety and the stability of the world. It is _despicable_ that CNN witheld this information for commercial purposes. Because that’s what it was. CNN had a competitive advantage in the market because of their Baghdad Bureau, and they didn’t want to lose the privilege. So they looked the other way while unspeakable things occurred. I don’t know how any of you can defend that. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/5 "2003-04-12T14:39:48Z")
“We had to suppress the news in order to cover it.” ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/6 "2003-04-12T15:17:54Z")
Well, there was another thing CNN had to consider, in addition to their “access”, which was the safety of their employees. Lets say you’re a CNN producer, and you’re considering whether or not to cover one of these stories. You have to realize, if you do, not only will CNN be kicked out of Iraq, but any Iraqi cameramen, interpreters, or any other Iraqi who works for you, will pretty certainly be killed by the government. They might have spiked some of those stories just to stop that from happening. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/7 "2003-04-12T15:18:40Z")
> [@](#): > > How would you feel if a news channel funded by the tobacco industry was selectively witholding information regarding the dangers of tobacco smoke? No cites offhand, but I’m old enough to remember incidents where news magazines who accepted heavy advertising from Big Tobacco were accused of biased news coverage of lung cancer stories. Ditto for Big Liquor and the same magazines and their coverage of alcoholism stories. Let’s face it, it’s still not an “ethics” question. News outlets are in the business of making money. They don’t have some kind of Holy Vocation for Fairness, to tell the American Consumer the unvarnished, unpleasant Truth with a capital T. It’s **“All the news that’s fit to print”**. And–what sleazy, unethical yellow journalism news outlet is it that has that slogan featured on their front page every day? The New York _Times_. > **[All the News That's Fit to Pixel](https://www.wired.com/2000/02/nisenholtz/)** > > Martin Nisenholtz made headlines by taking The New York Times digital without triggering an old media/new media war. But now it's time for the IPO. It's a 10-minute walk from the regal, cream-colored New York Times Building on West 43rd Street,... > [@](#): > > Sulzberger’s great-grandfather, Adolph S. Ochs, who purchased the Times in 1896 and began building it into what is probably the world’s best-known newspaper, came up with the slogan ALL THE NEWS THAT’S FIT TO PRINT. Early on, in an attempt to raise the struggling paper’s profile, he held a competition among readers to devise a new motto. The winner was a Connecticut man who suggested ALL THE WORLD’S NEWS, BUT NOT A SCHOOL FOR SCANDAL. Ochs decided to keep his own slogan, and by 1897, it began showing up in the upper-left corner of the front page, where it remains. It’s all about selling newspapers, guys. Y’all have been watching too many movies with the crusty old editor and the young whippersnapper banding together to Get The Truth Out that the Evil Conglomerate wants to suppress. “Not my newspaper!” shouts the Crusty Old Editor. “You’ll never use my newspaper for your foul mouthpiece!” And then he dies and the Young Whippersnapper is left to carry on. “Not the newspaper that my grandfather founded! You’ll never use this newspaper for your foul mouthpiece!” … etc. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/8 "2003-04-12T15:34:19Z")
I don’t understand how anyone can say that this is business as usual in the media. Sure, it is a long-standing problem in the media business. “Access” has always been a dirty word, in politics and journalism. And, in CNN’s defense, they are coming clean. OTOH, this means that CNN was serving as a propaganda outlet for the Iraqi regime for a number of years, which I and others have noted on occasion. When Peter Arnett worked for CNN especially, but not exclusively. Of course, there have always been people who jumped forth to defend CNNs obvious anti-US bias as objectivity, “anti-US” in the sense that the US government over several administrations was claiming all these acts of oppression and brutality that were not being supported by a knowing media. ---
**Author:** ![CC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CC)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cnns-spiking-of-iraqi-atrocities-a-fair-price-to-pay/168165/9 "2003-04-12T16:17:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*Nonetheless… They are selectively reporting things. That skews reality. It’s _bias_. > CNN had data to present, which it chose to withold. It doesn’t matter that it was a news organization, even. If a private business stumbled across evidence of atrocities while doing business in Iraq, I would expect them to go public with the information, so we the citizens of the world can make better decisions regaring our own safety and the stability of the world. > > \*\* I fear your frustration is rooted in an idealism which is not realistic. The fact is that every newpaper you’ve ever read consists of “information” they chose to include and excludes “information” they chose to leave out. A news organization cannot tell us everything that occurs in the world. They make choices, sometimes for financial reasons, sometimes for more practical reasons, sometimes for philosophical reasons. The New York Times, for example, has access to most of the stories that appear instead in the Enquirer. They choose to leave those stories out. There are also countless accounts of newpaper editors agonizing over whether or how to inform the powers that be of information they receive. Rest assured, a lot of things do get passed along. CNN is not much different from a newspaper, DDG’s characterization notwithstanding. I’d just recommend that you broaden your sources of information, and also ask yourself how anyone knows exactly what the truth/reality is. In any case, don’t count on any single source to make that decision for you. xo, C.