This really irritates the heck outta me!!!!!

[wild_deuce03]

Journalist comes home safe, but some debate stirs - Yahoo! News

First, glad the guys safe.

Now, for the NYT NOT to report on this (not too mention 40 other news outlets!!!) when they jump at the chance to report on ANYTHING that involves the military without regards to OPSEC for the sake of a story is frigging BS!!! Fine, they didn't report on him because they didn't want his value to seem that high. OK, good. Fair enough. THEN DO THAT WITH ALL OF YOUR REPORTING! SHOW SOME FRIGGING RESTRAINT!!! Just goes to show just how much I can't stand the press! This story just makes me sick!

New York Times executive editor Bill Keller told CNN the decision to ask other news outlets not to report the story was an "agonizing position that we revisited over and over again."

Are you serious? You convince 40 other news outlets not to report on ONE person yet you mention Secret info at the drop of a hat that could result in harming hundreds!

For the record, I'd just prefer that the press had A LOT more restraint in all situations. Just because something is news-worthy doesn't mean that people have the need/right to hear it!

[ALStensby]

Well, there's many, many, many stories available daily world-wide. One of many danged if you do, danged if you don't scenarios I'm guessing.

[Cranky CJ]

Everybody takes care of their own. Doctors, Lawyers, Police, Politicians, the military...the list goes on of groups that take care of thier own.

As far as the blackout on the kidnapping, I really don't have a problem with it. Thier strategy appeared to have worked. The press will report whatever they think will get them headlines and sales, ethics or morals be damned.

If they were truly objective in their reporting, they would have reported this story and let it go where it goes. That is the approach they take when reporting military activity, isn't it?

[wild_deuce03]

Well, there's many, many, many stories available daily world-wide. One of many danged if you do, danged if you don't scenarios I'm guessing.

Everybody takes care of their own. Doctors, Lawyers, Police, Politicians, the military...the list goes on of groups that take care of thier own.

As far as the blackout on the kidnapping, I really don't have a problem with it. Thier strategy appeared to have worked. The press will report whatever they think will get them headlines and sales, ethics or morals be damned.

If they were truly objective in their reporting, they would have reported this story and let it go where it goes. That is the approach they take when reporting military activity, isn't it?

You're right. I don't have a problem with the decision. The problem I have is that they show no restraint when showing news on the military!

[wild_deuce03]

This doesn't anger anyone else???

[OKC_Kent]

yes it isn't right, but cranky cj said it all in his first sentence. can't change it.

[wild_deuce03]

yes it isn't right, but cranky cj said it all in his first sentence. can't change it.

True, but I'm still mad damnit!

[ALStensby]

This doesn't anger anyone else???

It does, but not too much. When you consider the level of world news, there's a lot that will be missed or just not reported on. I'm guessing they made what they felt was the best decision based on the information they had.

As for the news and what they report in terms of OpSec, I can see that. But, they typically shouldn't even get it in the first place if the military had stayed dilligent on their end of OpSec.

[Cranky CJ]

yea, i hear ya duece but people only seem to care about what directly affects them. if you have loved ones in the military this story would get you more riled up than if you don't know anybody in the military or never served. this is going to sound cold or a bit mean spirited, but everytime a member of the media gets captured by an 'ememy' of sorts, i say to myself they shouldn't have been there in the first place.....they own the responsibility for their curcumstance.

[wild_deuce03]

It does, but not too much. When you consider the level of world news, there's a lot that will be missed or just not reported on. I'm guessing they made what they felt was the best decision based on the information they had.

As for the news and what they report in terms of OpSec, I can see that. But, they typically shouldn't even get it in the first place if the military had stayed dilligent on their end of OpSec.

Yes, you're right. The military does need to be more diligent. BUT.......if the "certain direction not to be confused with your right arm " people would keep the "right" of the press being in these locations then it wouldn't be as much of an issue either!

yea, i hear ya duece but people only seem to care about what directly affects them. if you have loved ones in the military this story would get you more riled up than if you don't know anybody in the military or never served. this is going to sound cold or a bit mean spirited, but everytime a member of the media gets captured by an 'ememy' of sorts, i say to myself they shouldn't have been there in the first place.....they own the responsibility for their curcumstance.

I agree completely! The press has no business in a majority of these situations.

[A-J]

When I was in the Army deployed as part of a UN peacekeeping force in Yugoslavia, I barely avoided a court martial for decking a cameraman who was getting in the way of my teams job. It's one thing to film it and document activities, it's a whole other deal to get right in the middle and start firing off questions. I've always hated the newsies, and they will NEVER have my respect. There's an old saying in the journalism biz that says "Why let a little thing like facts F--- up a good story?"

[Guitar7272]

It's extremely hypocritical. The news will report on troop positions, national security issues, foreign policy strategies and contigency plans, etc at the drop of a hat but they sure can keep their mouths shut when they want to. Journalistic integrity is a complete farce - they only use it as an excuse to defend revenue generation.

[wild_deuce03]

It's extremely hypocritical. The news will report on troop positions, national security issues, foreign policy strategies and contigency plans, etc at the drop of a hat but they sure can keep their mouths shut when they want to. Journalistic integrity is a complete farce - they only use it as an excuse to defend revenue generation.

And that's EXACTLY what has me so pi$$ed about it!!!

[wild_deuce03]

When I was in the Army deployed as part of a UN peacekeeping force in Yugoslavia, I barely avoided a court martial for decking a cameraman who was getting in the way of my teams job. It's one thing to film it and document activities, it's a whole other deal to get right in the middle and start firing off questions. I've always hated the newsies, and they will NEVER have my respect. There's an old saying in the journalism biz that says "Why let a little thing like facts F--- up a good story?"

Hopefully you hit him good!

[Hot Cruiser]

Yeah, I'm very often aggravated by what the news media report and fail to report. Maybe worse, nearly every time I was interviewed by local newspaper reporters when we lived in the U.K. what I had to say was misrepresented when the story was printed. I quickly learned to say little or nothing either in the U.K. or in the U.S. Now, while I'm often aggravated by the news media I either figure that the best thing to do is to forget about it, or if I can't bring myself to do that I write a letter to the editor if the problem is with a newspaper article.

[sharky1381]

It is unfortunate but most "news" organizations today (and I use the term lightly) have lost sight of there responsibility and purpose for being to accurately report the news free of editorial comment except in the proper place (editorial page, commentary shows etc.). They have for the most part transformed themselves into news making organizations that attempt to direct public thought in one ideological direction or another. There really is very little journalistic integrity left. The entirely one sided reporting of the last campaign and obvious support given to one candidate by the majority of the press that is admittedly liberal is undeniable. It will be very interesting to see a study of the affect that reporting had on the outcome of the election.

[Rocket_88]

I have seen TV news teams behaving like the dregs of humanity. They interfere in conflict situations, sometimes making things worse by their presence. They cynically record the suffering of the dying and impede efforts to save the injured. They disrespect the dead and the living alike.

On one occasion a BBC news reporter was covering a riot situation and was doing a piece to camera, wearing a flack jacket when one wasn't needed, with a car on fire behind her. I was nearby and heard her saying that she was less than 50 metres away from a riot in full flow. She wasn't. She was 400 metres away from a burning car in a side-street that was the aftermath of an earlier riot. I challenged her on her claim, interrupting the filming. She tried to put me back in my box, but I was having none of it. I had seen footage of her doing the same thing before and I called her a self-aggrandising peddler of lies and half-truths.

The worst behaviour I ever saw was on a different occasion, from a French TV news team. They turned up expecting a riot situation, to find that all was quiet and peaceful. They called some of the local kids over and gave them money to start rioting. The kids went and told their parents, who came out, set fire to the French team's van and smashed their equipment.