Tuesday, May 17, 2005
Well now
Regarding my post from this morning, i noticed that they have already pulled the story from the front page. They are still hosting the page, but it is no longer listed anywhere...
This happened with the first story they did about the memo (Conyer's letter to the White House), but not to the 'McCain: I don't agree with British war memo' story...
Now why would they post a story for a few hours, then remove all mention of it from their site? I wonder who gave them a call...
Funny enough, most folks consider CNN to be a 'lefty' news source, and i can see where it might look that way when you compare it to Faux News (Little Known Fact: CNN licks bush's balls 80% less than Faux, of course Faux is a hard act to follow in that regard), but it really is just the Corporate News Network now. Why do i rail against them when i know that they are just an ineffectual bunch of hacks? Why do i read their website when i know that they aren't covering the news, the whole news, and nothing but the news?
Because other people think that CNN is 'your one source for news'. Its still the preferred channel in our breakroom at work, which is better than having to sit and watch Faux all day. CNN has become the mainstream pacifier of journalism, and i worry about what they are focusing on, or hiding. how is it that they can spend WEEKS on Terri Shiavo (none of our business), but something that could cause problems for the bushies only gets a few hours on their website?? Why the hell would you post a story that you were only going to try and hide from your readers anyway?
Is there some sort of internal conflict over there? is the night-webmaster a liberal, and the morning-webmaster a conservative? Whats up? I think i need some answers here...
tomkitty
This happened with the first story they did about the memo (Conyer's letter to the White House), but not to the 'McCain: I don't agree with British war memo' story...
Now why would they post a story for a few hours, then remove all mention of it from their site? I wonder who gave them a call...
Funny enough, most folks consider CNN to be a 'lefty' news source, and i can see where it might look that way when you compare it to Faux News (Little Known Fact: CNN licks bush's balls 80% less than Faux, of course Faux is a hard act to follow in that regard), but it really is just the Corporate News Network now. Why do i rail against them when i know that they are just an ineffectual bunch of hacks? Why do i read their website when i know that they aren't covering the news, the whole news, and nothing but the news?
Because other people think that CNN is 'your one source for news'. Its still the preferred channel in our breakroom at work, which is better than having to sit and watch Faux all day. CNN has become the mainstream pacifier of journalism, and i worry about what they are focusing on, or hiding. how is it that they can spend WEEKS on Terri Shiavo (none of our business), but something that could cause problems for the bushies only gets a few hours on their website?? Why the hell would you post a story that you were only going to try and hide from your readers anyway?
Is there some sort of internal conflict over there? is the night-webmaster a liberal, and the morning-webmaster a conservative? Whats up? I think i need some answers here...
tomkitty
