<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What Media Bias? Part I</title>
	<atom:link href="http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/</link>
	<description>Sometimes the truth hurts</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 01:29:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: UrbanGrounds &#187; Blog Archive &#187; What Media Bias? Part VI</title>
		<link>http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/#comment-28320</link>
		<dc:creator>UrbanGrounds &#187; Blog Archive &#187; What Media Bias? Part VI</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2006 01:59:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://urbangrounds.com/?p=572#comment-28320</guid>
		<description>[...] What Media Bias? Part I [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] What Media Bias? Part I [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robbie</title>
		<link>http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/#comment-12367</link>
		<dc:creator>Robbie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2005 15:35:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://urbangrounds.com/?p=572#comment-12367</guid>
		<description>Jeff, I&#039;m still not convinced that CNN has been completely honest in their explanations. Remember, just because it was a &quot;glitch&quot; doesn&#039;t mean that it wasn&#039;t intentional.

Remember this from the operator&#039;s statement: &quot;&lt;em&gt;We&lt;/em&gt; did it to make a point&quot;?

If these are his &quot;personal views&quot;, who is this &quot;we&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, I&#8217;m still not convinced that CNN has been completely honest in their explanations. Remember, just because it was a &#8220;glitch&#8221; doesn&#8217;t mean that it wasn&#8217;t intentional.</p>
<p>Remember this from the operator&#8217;s statement: &#8220;<em>We</em> did it to make a point&#8221;?</p>
<p>If these are his &#8220;personal views&#8221;, who is this &#8220;we&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Harrell</title>
		<link>http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/#comment-12281</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Harrell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:13:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://urbangrounds.com/?p=572#comment-12281</guid>
		<description>See? Thatâ€™s why I object to throwing around the word â€œlie.â€ Poor Jim there ended up with &lt;i&gt;totally&lt;/i&gt; the wrong idea of what happened.

Jim, it &lt;i&gt;really was&lt;/i&gt; just a technical malfunction. The person who answered the phone was in no way connected to the control room at CNN Center where the problem originated. The person who was subsequently fired was speaking entirely out of his ass. There was no â€œstunt.â€ Okay? There really wasnâ€™t. Pardon me for saying so, but blindly asserting that there was demonstrates a pretty remarkable ignorance of how television works.

And yet now this rumor is going to persist, making all of us conservatives look just ever so slightly more like crazy people. Great. Thanks a lot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See? Thatâ€™s why I object to throwing around the word â€œlie.â€ Poor Jim there ended up with <i>totally</i> the wrong idea of what happened.</p>
<p>Jim, it <i>really was</i> just a technical malfunction. The person who answered the phone was in no way connected to the control room at CNN Center where the problem originated. The person who was subsequently fired was speaking entirely out of his ass. There was no â€œstunt.â€ Okay? There really wasnâ€™t. Pardon me for saying so, but blindly asserting that there was demonstrates a pretty remarkable ignorance of how television works.</p>
<p>And yet now this rumor is going to persist, making all of us conservatives look just ever so slightly more like crazy people. Great. Thanks a lot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Howard</title>
		<link>http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/#comment-12255</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Howard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:59:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://urbangrounds.com/?p=572#comment-12255</guid>
		<description>&quot;Lying&quot;  is exactly the correct word to use.  CNN propogated the malfunction theory before they ever investigated the incident.  That&#039;s assuming they did any kind of investigation.

CNN would have stuck to the &#039;wardrobe malfunction&#039; lie had a caller not recorded the conversation with the CNN employee.  

A perfectly reasonable explanation for the firing is that the employee wasn&#039;t fired for &#039;x-ing&#039; the Vice President, he was fired for admitting it.

In any case the fact that a technician felt empowered to pull such a stunt demonstrates the institutional basis that permeates CNN.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Lying&#8221;  is exactly the correct word to use.  CNN propogated the malfunction theory before they ever investigated the incident.  That&#8217;s assuming they did any kind of investigation.</p>
<p>CNN would have stuck to the &#8216;wardrobe malfunction&#8217; lie had a caller not recorded the conversation with the CNN employee.  </p>
<p>A perfectly reasonable explanation for the firing is that the employee wasn&#8217;t fired for &#8216;x-ing&#8217; the Vice President, he was fired for admitting it.</p>
<p>In any case the fact that a technician felt empowered to pull such a stunt demonstrates the institutional basis that permeates CNN.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robbie</title>
		<link>http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/#comment-12254</link>
		<dc:creator>Robbie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:32:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://urbangrounds.com/?p=572#comment-12254</guid>
		<description>Jeff, that&#039;s a valid criticism (of me).

In retrospect, I think my charge of  &quot;lying&quot; stems more from my cumulative experience and opinion of CNN rather than just this single incident.

Starting with the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/02/tailwind.johnson/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Tailwind&lt;/a&gt; story back in 1998 I&#039;ve been skeptical of almost anything politcal being reported by the Ted Turner news network.

Is &quot;lying&quot; a bit of hyperbole? Perhaps. 

While I commend CNN for acting quickly to fire the operator who made those statements,  I still don&#039;t believe their &quot;technical glitch&quot; claim either. Too much past bias in their reporting for me to give them the benefit of the doubt this time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, that&#8217;s a valid criticism (of me).</p>
<p>In retrospect, I think my charge of  &#8220;lying&#8221; stems more from my cumulative experience and opinion of CNN rather than just this single incident.</p>
<p>Starting with the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/02/tailwind.johnson/" rel="nofollow">Tailwind</a> story back in 1998 I&#8217;ve been skeptical of almost anything politcal being reported by the Ted Turner news network.</p>
<p>Is &#8220;lying&#8221; a bit of hyperbole? Perhaps. </p>
<p>While I commend CNN for acting quickly to fire the operator who made those statements,  I still don&#8217;t believe their &#8220;technical glitch&#8221; claim either. Too much past bias in their reporting for me to give them the benefit of the doubt this time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Harrell</title>
		<link>http://urbangrounds.com/2005/11/cnn-lied/#comment-12253</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Harrell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:15:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://urbangrounds.com/?p=572#comment-12253</guid>
		<description>You know that the individual you quoted here was a telephone operator and not an actual CNN spokesman, right? In other words, no, there&#039;s absolutely no reason in the world to accuse CNN of lying the way you have here.

Please don&#039;t turn into one of those crazy people who throws around the word &quot;lying&quot; like it doesn&#039;t mean anything. There are enough of those people out there already.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know that the individual you quoted here was a telephone operator and not an actual CNN spokesman, right? In other words, no, there&#8217;s absolutely no reason in the world to accuse CNN of lying the way you have here.</p>
<p>Please don&#8217;t turn into one of those crazy people who throws around the word &#8220;lying&#8221; like it doesn&#8217;t mean anything. There are enough of those people out there already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

