Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

18
Letters
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:00 AM

We don't report so you won't decide

How Fox News covered -- or didn't -- the downfall of a Republican member of Congress.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 04:52 PM

Don't Forget the Coverage of Libby

A few weeks back soon after Libby was indicted, I surfed the headlines on the major TV news sites.

CNN: Libby Indicted

MSNBC: Libby Indicted

ABC News: Libby Indicted

CBS News: Libby Indicted

and FOX:

Libby Resigns

They're not even pretending anymore...

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 03:42 AM

Whatever happened to the 5 Ws

If the newspapers picked up the AP story as is, with the Republican affiliation not listed in the lead, the question then becomes "why did the AP bury it?"

It doesn't have to mean a trumpeting headline such as "Republican congressman resigns for accepting bribes." But whatever happened to referencing the political affiliation (R-CA, in this case) after the first mention of a politician's name? This information is part of the "who," which is part of the 5 W's, according to journalism 101.

Add the Minneapolis Star Tribune to the list. Their mantra of late is "We're not liberals, really we're not," which makes them the joke of liberals and conservatives alike.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 06:29 AM

Not in the least!

From past experiences about such outrages to friends who are journalists would point out that the fact the man was a Republican wasn't really relavant to the story...

The 'story' was the dude's admissions, and quitting congress. This is actually what 'fair' reporting looks like...

Stuff and nonsense sir!

Especially in a wire story, the first reference to a US Representative always, always, always contains both party affiliation and the state represented. To wit:

"Randy 'Duke' Cunningham (R-CA) resigned from Congress today. He pled guilty to charges of bribery before a federal court two days previously." Etc etc.

In fact, party affiliation is relevant to any story about an elected official. Even if it is just a parenthetical reference like the one above, it should be included in each and every story. Omitting affiliation is like writing about a sports figure and not mentioning what team he or she plays for. It simply isn't done.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 09:29 AM

Affiliation of Cunningham

I noticed in the article written on Yahoo news, that Cunningham's affiliation was not mentioned.

I went to the internet to look it up, just because

I had a hunch. I know they would have used it if

the guy had been a democrat. Not a big deal, but

just shows how insidious the creeps are. Sharon

Heldenbrand

Most Active Letters Threads

426

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
407

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
210

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
111

How dare you criticize wasteful defense spending!

So you think it's only terrorist-appeasing lefties who are down on Pentagon profligacy? Think again
59

Police to talk to Woods

Early morning crash raises questions, and revives tabloid speculation

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon