It’s interesting to compare CNN - the homepage to which many of us migrate when there is a breaking crisis – to a London blogger in the midst of the continuing terror crisis in that city. Both have strengths and weaknesses, but as the potential of blogs may be greater as their organization increases.
PJ Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that PJ Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the editorial staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pjmedia.com.
I quit going to CNN’s home page for breaking news several years ago. The problem is their news coverage is very heavily biased against Americanism and very pro terrorist. It was never the place to go to find out what was really going on…after all they are a core team member of the TSM (Terrorist Supporting Media). If you like Aesop’s Fables or Grimm’s Fairy Tales, you’ll love CNN.
The blogs could also help by ramming home the real reasons behind the bombings. Google “Ghazi Warriors” to see the exact picture. Ghazis are traditional Muslim warriors who move around in small groups killing infidels – not airing political grievances about Iraq, Kyoto etc. This phenomenon has been going on since the 13th century – before Iraq, before Israel and even before Andalusia! It’s only surfaced in Europe and the US recently due to mass Muslim migration.
The headline on CNN:
‘Police kill man on London Tube’
Oh, that poor man!
Yes, indeed, both have their strengths (and weaknesses).
What I would like to see utimately, in a perfect world, is a symbiotic relationship between MSM and “alternative” media in which each minimizes those weaknesses by playing to its relative strengths. In my perfect world, those in the mainstream play it straight because they have no other choice (I would ask and hope for enlightenment, but I’ll take what I can get).
While an element of competition is always required in the pursuit of excellence, for optimum result in this endeavor cooperation is the key. I think our side is willing.
Vulgorilla–point taken, but I think you’re wrong about Aesop and Bros. Grimm. Their stories carry loads of truth of the hard knocks variety–good for a world that deals out knocks. And they have that humor that tells of some humility in the face of a huge world.
CNN is to truth as a bag of saccharine is to nutrition: a pale ghost of the real thing. I don’t think CNN is even selling fiction. I think it’s more, in Pauli’s beautiful phrase, “not even wrong”. It’s un-thought. It’s going through the motions of analysis, with no engagement, no traction of the mind on reality.
One strength of bloggers is that they seem particularly good at connecting dots. an example
For on the scene, breaking news CNN is still hard to beat. However on the TV side anyway, the reporters and anchors too often get in the way. If, for example, I never have to hear from Christian Amanpour again, it will still be too soon.
And this from an English blogger:
http://www.perfect.co.uk/
Certainly adds a lot of content to what we’re seeing on tv.