Quote:
Originally posted by Love_Spell_6
Ok..so don't u think Rather (or other reporters) would have checked every possible source and checked it thrice before airing such garbage? Knox says their probably not authentic..isn't this the lady that typed the Lt's memos? THe family said they aren't authentic..namely because THEY have all of their fathers files... they didn't bother to show the other side of the story...which would have given the story some objectivity...but they still stand by their sources?   The only sources they stand by are the ones that agree with their viewpoints.
|
That's correct, but the only ones you stand by are the ones that disagree.
So, we have two "experts" figuratively pointing their fingers at each other. I have no idea which one is correct, and I don't think you do either.
NPR had a discussion of this issue this afternoon with a Journalism Ethics Professor from the Pointer Institute. What he said basically is that:
A) CBS has a right to make the claims.
B) CBS has a responsibility to keep checking it's sources due to the controversy.
C) The opposing side (Bush/RNC) have every right to disavow the claims.
D) That side also has every right to bring in their own "experts."
What we can't believe is the folks on the BLOG who apparantely started the controversy over the typeface, etc. So far, "experts" on both sides disagree on whether it was available in the 1970's.
As I said, I don't know what is true in this case, but I absolutely boil when anyone (either side) who is not directly involved in any case of this kind makes declarative comments that they can't back up. It's heresay. Opinions are fine -- it's the absolute statements that I object to.
That is so common in this election that I'm about ready to vote "NO" for president.