Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • An Example For Others

    Posted by James R. Rummel on July 17th, 2009 (All posts by )

    CNN has announced that they will not renew the contract for reporter Susan Roesgen. (Details here and here.)

    Ms. Roesgen became nationally famous after she vigorously argued, on air, with Chicago TEA Party protesters she was in the process of interviewing. She characterized the protests as…

    “… anti-government, anti-CNN since this is highly promoted by the right-wing conservative network Fox.”

    But it was her smug, superior exchanges with other protesters that really got people riled. Lucky thing Founding Bloggers were there to catch it all on tape.

    I wrote to CNN after the story broke, pointing out that Fox had actually fired veteran, award-winning reporter Rebecca Aguilar after the badgering she was giving to a 70-year-old man caused him to break down into tears during an interview. At the time, I openly wondered if Fox was going to prove to be the more ethical cable news channel. With Ms. Roesgen’s firing, CNN has proven that they can at least rise to the same standard set by so-called Conservatives if they strive mightily.

    Of course, Fox is being sued by Ms. Aguilar, who claims that the firing was based on racial prejudice. This is not something CNN has to worry about, as Ms. Roesgen is not a racial minority, so they certainly aren’t at much risk. But that doesn’t detract from the fact that CNN has finally done the right thing.

    (Hat tip to Glenn.)

     

    19 Responses to “An Example For Others”

    1. emdfl Says:

      Why do I suspect that Ms Roesgen will be picked up tomorrow by some friend/affiliate of the commienewsnet?

    2. Greg Says:

      (Comment removed, and contributor marked as a source of spam, for shameless link whoring.)

    3. Jack Coupal Says:

      However, Susan Roesgen is a womyn and accordingly is a member of a non-privileged majority.

      If Sue still wants CNN to reinstate her, her hiring of an affirmative action shyster to represent her will get her back on the CNN payroll toot sweet.

      btw, James, did CNN ever reply to your letter?

    4. Gregory Koster Says:

      Dear Mr. Rummel: It’s not quite correct to compare Roesgen to Aguilar, because Aguilar was on the staff of a Fox affiliate, KDFW, not Fox National. Fox National had no control over Aguilar. They could, it is true, have spoken to KDFW expressing displeasure. My own guess is that they didn’t. Aguilar’s actions and the uproar they generated did the job for them. Why rile the affiliates when you don’t have to?

      My own bet is that SR will be more likely to wind up working for The One than going back to media. But even more likely is that she ends up nowhere. She’s made a name for herself, but a) a most odious one and b) doesn’t have the power to look her adversaries in the face and snarl Whaddaya gonna do about it, hey? What does she bring to any organization? Fanatical loyalty to The One? Check. Viewing a belt as the upper boundary of any political/press argument? Check. Cannot pass a rabies nor an IQ test? Check. Good virtues for any One supporter to have. Trouble is, you can order such supporters from Amazon for a measly sum, quantity discounts available, that don’t have to carry all the baggage SR does. These supporters aren’t encumbered, and can swing the journalist’s microphone, which looks much like a cop’s nightstick and has an even more devastating effect.

      Sincerely yours,
      Gregory Koster

    5. Victor Erimita Says:

      Well, great, but CNN’s other reporters, and especially their wretched anchors, are only the tiniest bit less blatant in their bias and their utter contempt for facts or for opinions that deviate from the radical Left playbook. No one in the U.S. watches CNN anyway, except when they are subjected to it in airports. Internationally, different story, but this firing won’t change their behavior a bit.

      Fox’s main problem is not that they are so biased they distort the facts. Their problem is that they are in love with tabloid journalism, sleaze and sensationalism.

    6. Ed Driscoll Says:

      Great post, but one minor point: Aguilar was employed by a local (Dallas-Ft. Worth, I believe) station affiliated with Fox; that’s not quite the same (at least as far as your comparison) as being employed by their national cable news channel. TTBOMK, local stations have a pretty wide latitude in terms of the reporters they can hire (and fire) and their own biases.

    7. Erich Says:

      She says “anti-government” and “anti-CNN” like those are things to be ashamed of. Personally, I see those as things to be proud of.

    8. Mattled Says:

      I just read about the CNN interview with Cathy Areu, WaPo magazine editor.

      Campbell Brown had no follow up question, no comment, nothing to Areu’s outrageous statement: that The Wise Lie-tina (Sotomayor) really meant to say that any Latina woman would have better judgment than any white man.

      No follow up question, just let her ( and ANY liberal) slide. But never a Conservative.

      New Moniker: MSM anchors/reporters are No FUQ’s —No Follow Up Questions.

    9. Plumpplumber(balding) Says:

      SR is young, and lacks judgment, to be sure. However, blatant fanaticism towards the O is hard to gloss over. She was looking for a fight. At the Tea Parties I have attended in East Texas, we’ve never seen such behavior. Was she trying to provoke violence? Perhaps, but her transgression was putting the Tea Partiers in a favorable light. I figure that she was trying to impress her “superiors”. As the political climate deteriorates, we’ll see more of her type of behavior. Just how far are we from civil insurrection, I wonder? What will be the tipping point? Where will the violence begin?

    10. kwo Says:

      “Well, great, but CNN’s other reporters, and especially their wretched anchors, are only the tiniest bit less blatant in their bias…”

      Exactly so. Firing Roesgen is a cover. She’s less expendable than Anderson “Teabaggers” Cooper.

    11. sherlock Says:

      SR’s performance is a good illustration of the bubble the left exists in – she is genuinely angry that a person is protesting vigorously and agrily against their government while Democrats are in power. In her mind this is horrible behavior, bordering on obscene – thus the reference to “family TV”, and if it is not illegal, it should be. She actually is completely genuine here, but in support of Democrats, not America.

      Now if it was 2006, she would have been interviewing people engaging in that ultimate form of patriotism, criticizing and mocking the President and his policies.

    12. James R. Rummel Says:

      Jack Coupal left a comment

      “btw, James, did CNN ever reply to your letter?”

      No, they didn’t. But they probably had to deal with a great many letters concerning her behavior, and I’m not famous enough to warrant special attention.

      Gregory Koster left a comment

      “It’s not quite correct to compare Roesgen to Aguilar, because Aguilar was on the staff of a Fox affiliate, KDFW, not Fox National. Fox National had no control over Aguilar.”

      Very good point! Ed Driscoll pretty much says the same thing, but Gregory beat him to the punch.

    13. John Galt Says:

      She will fit right in at MSNBC.

    14. ic Says:

      “Well, great, but CNN’s other reporters, and especially their wretched anchors, are only the tiniest bit less blatant in their bias…”

      The non-newshour anchors, at least the honest ones, admit to their bias, and are entitled to their biased opinions. But reporters are to “report”, they have their own opinions, but are not supposed to air them when they are reporting. They can distort the news by reporting or not reporting them, by interviewing interviewees who have the reporter’s opinions, but they cannot display their own bias while reporting. It’s hypocritical, isn’t it? But we are a country of hypocrites, anyway. We elect politicians whom we know will not keep their promises. We blame “predatory” lenders when we cannot repay a loan that we knew we were not qualified for. We call paying politicians “contributions”, and call pocketing taxpayers’ money earmarks. You know what, in more honest countries, such as China, those are called “briberies”, “paybacks”, and “backdoor deals”.

      Ms. Roesgen’s problem was she forgot the hypocrite’s “unbiased” mask.

    15. Retro Says:

      I’ll lay odds that she’ll be working for MSNBC fellating Olberman (or the other wanker that pees down his leg everytime he hears obaba speak) before this summer is over.

    16. What I Think Says:

      If Susan Roesgen’s job was to report the news, then she did an extremely unprofessional job.

    17. happyfeet Says:

      I doubt welfare queen Jeffy Immelt’s MSNBC has any use for her… CNN isn’t firing Susan for being a dirty socialist propagandist they’re firing her for being an amateurish dirty socialist propagandist.

    18. JohnBoy Says:

      I am betting our girl gets picked up by MSNBC.

    19. Plumpplumber(balding) Says:

      Thou shalt not let the cat out of the bag.