[OPE-L:5999] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: alleged CNN falsification

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@acsu.buffalo.edu)
Date: Sun Sep 23 2001 - 09:00:56 EDT

Nicola, What was on my mind was Rakesh in 5966 "I would hope that this list
could do more than become obsessed with inconsequential rumors like this.
It would not matter  if the footage had been  created out of whole cloth.",
and my disagreement with him in this regard.  

I feel that IF the footnote used is indeed old footage, then it's a very
useful point to make to persons watching TV these days, more useful in my
judgement than rather sophisticated arguments Rakesh makes (which I can
share).  I back up my perception after seeing how people reacted when I
verbally told them the story.

In some sense, I'm saying we need to make SIMPLE points these days, points
that carry a CLEAR message without a lot of argumentation and wordy

I was not disagreeing with anything else Rakesh wrote about the media
reporting and didn't feel the need to affirm that.  But now I do, just so
you know.  Paul

********************* http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka

nicola taylor <n.taylor@student.murdoch.edu.au> said, on 09/23/01:

>On the issue of 'truth' however, I think that Paul has completely missed
>Rakesh's point.  Which was (correct me if I'm wrong, Rakesh) that the
>people whose images were projected into American living rooms were not
>interviewed or asked to express their point of view.  On the contrary
>their point of view was wholly ignored and adapted to fit within the story
>that CNN wanted to tell.  The question about the 'truth' and 'falsity' of
>film and still images therefore goes much deeper than the narrow question
>of 'when' the film was taken (although this is important in its own

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Oct 02 2001 - 00:00:05 EDT