Re: CNN: All the news that we see fit to print

["Dan Billings" <billings@suscom-maine.net>]

I'm not talking about bias or the tough job of covering a war while in enemy
territory, but a pattern of conduct by CNN over a period of years.

CNN's Eason Jordan writes: "Saddam Hussein's eldest son, Uday, told me in
1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had
defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan."
Jordan told King Hussein about the threat to his life but kept the other
threat to himself and CNN never reported the story.  A few months later, the
brothers-in-law were lured back to Iraq and killed.  Jordan's excuse for
doing nothing is "If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have
responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant
in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior
officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line."  Of
course by staying silent, two other people died.  And the world was kept
from knowing that Iraqi leaders were threatening other Arab heads of state.

This is just one of the stories that he tells.  CNN decided that they were
better off keeping quiet so they could stay in Iraq.  By staying -- for
years -- they gave their viewers the impression that they were reporting the
true story from Iraq, as best as they could find out the truth in a police
state.  In fact, they were not telling their viewers what they knew.  If a
journalist can't report what they know, what's the point of covering a story
at all?  Wouldn't CNN's viewers have been better served by CNN pulling out
and telling the whole story?

This begs the question: What is CNN not telling us to keep their bureaus
open in other police states like Cuba and China?  What deals did they cut
with Castro to establish their bureau there?

-- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine