Tuesday, April 15, 2003
posted by Joel at 7:25 PM
Eason Jordans op ed piece in the NYT describes CNN's containment policy, bottling up stories that would reveal the depravity and cruelty of the Hussien regime, for the stated purpose of protecting the Iraqi CNN employees. He follows that op ed up with a nifty little letter explaining why all the critics of his policy are so wrong.
He even garners some understanding from Alex Jones, director of the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy, at Harvard's Kennedy School.
Thats all great and fine, I am sure the debate will rage for a while about CNN's cupability, I have made my decision about CNN several years ago, so it is all irrelevant to me.
What I would like to posit into the blogosphere is a bit of equivocation, if CNN can concievably make compromises regarding thier coverage, substantial compromises in fact, in order to protect their access and thier people, would it not follow that The United States government could make statements of certain knowledge of WMD's, but not provide proof due to losing their access to monitor those same WMD's and/or endanger people providing that access?