Courtesy of Dictionary.com:
Full (fŏŏl)
–adjective
1. complete; entire; maximum.
2. of the maximum size, amount, extent, volume, etc.
Dis•clo•sure [di-skloh-zher]
–noun
1. the act or an instance of disclosing; exposure; revelation.
2. that which is disclosed; a revelation.
To be discussed later in this post ...
I had the feeling that there would be a substitute anchor on Friday, as this will probably be the last weekend that Anderson will have off before the YouTube debate on November 28th. And so seeing Soledad O’Brien in the anchor chair was no surprise!
More post-debate analysis: I must admit that I did think that Friday’s discussion was a little broader-based, although there was still the underlying “assumption” that Hillary Clinton “won” the debate. The memorable sound bytes from the panel discussion were as follows: Candy Crowley commented that none of the candidates took Hillary to task over her somewhat flippant response and ‘brush-off’ of the negative effects that NAFTA has had on American labor. John King commented about John Edwards, saying that voters are asking “When are we going to hear more about “President Edwards’ and what he will do to help the country, as opposed to Senator Edwards attacking Senator Clinton? And David Gergen commented that Clinton’s opponents missed opportunities to ‘inflict new wounds’ and will now have to spend their time ‘on the ground’ in Iowa trying to circumvent any momentum she has coming out of the debate, since there won’t be a negative ‘bounce’ in the press, as there was post-Philly.
Joe Johns also had a KTH segment that reviewed Governor Richardson’s debate claims about the positive effects that have been realized in New Mexico since they began issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants – namely a decrease from 33% to 11% in the number of uninsured motorists, and the fact that traffic fatalities have decreased. Personally, I’m not clear about what one has to with the other, but OK … they’re both positive trends, and that’s a good thing. But critics point out that many times, fake documents are used to get these ID’s, as in the case of the 9/11 hijackers. And that’s (one of) the basic logical points that I’m certainly always concerned about!
A teen suicide: The second main story of the evening was a segment handled exquisitely well and with tremendous sensitivity by Gary Tuchman. It was about the suicide of Megan Meier, a teen with a MySpace page, who thought she’d found a possible “love” online named “Josh Evans”, and when the relationship turned nasty and she felt rejected by “Josh”, she hung herself using a belt inside her closet. It turns out that “Josh” was the creation of a neighborhood mother of another teenage girl, who allegedly wanted to find out why her daughter and Megan were having some kind of ‘dispute’. This mother (and I use the term loosely) created a MySpace account solely to communicate with Megan Meier, and it turned into a horrible cycle of cyber-bullying by this woman. She told Megan (using the ‘Josh Evans’ identity) that “the world would be better off without you.” Oh yeah – and she also went to Megan’s funeral, and was ‘relieved’ to learn that Megan had a number of other issues that she was dealing with – I assume so she could deny any blame that might be cast her way because of what happened. I can’t even write what I’d like to call her – just assume that it’s 100% unprintable.
As a follow-up, Soledad interviewed both Jeff Toobin and Dr. Drew Pinsky. Jeff and Soledad had quite an exchange, as Jeff was explaining that there isn’t enough of a causal factor to bring criminal charges against this woman. And even in a civil suit, there would probably be only a partial percentage of ‘blame’ assigned, as the defense would be that Megan had so many other problems, the MySpace bullying couldn’t be the sole cause of the suicide.
I was horrified at the ultimate reply received by Megan’s parents (Ron & Tina Meier), when Gary asked them if they’d had any contact with this other family. They had contact, but preferred not to repeat most of what was said. Can’t say I blame them for that. But the overall response they got is what mortified me and makes me furious beyond words – these grieving parents were told to “give it a rest”.
There actually are times on this blog when I don’t ‘fully disclose’ my feelings about a story. This isn’t going to be one of them. If there’s any justice in the universe, I hope this woman is dealt with appropriately at final judgment time. For eternity. Period.
Moving on ...
Wow - talk about debate “backlash” …
Could some of it be because Thursday’s debate was the most watched one yet? With over 4 million viewers?
There are more than a few people that are, for lack of a better term, “hackled off” because they feel that: (1) the debate was handled sloppily, and/or (2) the post-debate analysis was simply a collection of Clinton mouthpieces glorifying her redemption.
BTW – here’s my ‘full disclosure’ – I’m not a Clinton supporter, at least not yet. So you’ll understand my bias as I write this ... ;-)
Regarding point # 1 – yes, the candidates took advantage of Wolf – that’s not in dispute. And the crowd should have been controlled better. I don’t recall hearing that level of booing allowed at other debates. I think the best ‘set-up’ so far was the PBS debates moderated by Tavis Smiley. Each candidate was allowed 90 seconds to answer each question, and the first person allowed to answer rotated according to their stage position. If that had been done on Thursday, Joe Biden would have answered the first question, and then everyone else, in turn, would have had time to answer the same question. Bill Richardson would have been the first one to answer the second question, and so on. I don’t remember if there was a mike ‘cut-off’ provision at the PBS debates, but I’m all for it! That should eliminate a good deal of the jockeying and posturing that goes on before and during the debate.
Regarding point # 2 – (remember my bias) … I do think that the discussion was at least slightly skewed towards Clinton support. I don’t like saying that, as I truly would have preferred a more critical examination of the event. But I do take issue with this massive petty whining about CNN not giving ‘full disclosure’ of James Carville’s support of Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. For heaven's sake - if anyone doesn't already know that Carville is going to be inclined to praise Hillary Clinton whenever possible - that person has been living under a rock for the past 15 years!! Does his "loyalty" have to be disclosed ad nauseum each and every time that he appears on CNN? I certainly hope not!!
You can read a number of interesting articles about this topic that have been published over the past couple of days via a simple Google search – but one of the more interesting is from the LA Times – generally regarded as part of the ‘liberal media’, but not-so-kind to Senator Clinton in this debate instance.
There’s been one more favorable article published about Anderson’s speech at Claremont College this past Tuesday – from Tony Krickl at the Claremont Courier:
CNN personality and award-winning journalist Anderson Cooper regaled a crowd of Claremont McKenna College students with tales of war reporting, government failure and his rise to becoming the new face of journalism.
To relate with the young audience, Mr. Cooper began his address by discussing a post high school trip he took throughout southern Africa, an adventure which he said “really opened my eyes and quickened my pulse.”
After college, Mr. Cooper became interested in becoming a foreign correspondent but didn’t know quite how to go about doing it. So he came up with a plan and armed himself with a video camera and a fake press pass made on a friend’s computer.
“My plan was to start going to wars,” he explained. “And I figured if I went to places where most people were too scared to go, I wouldn’t have much competition.”
He first visited Burma, also known as Myanmar, to cover the national revolution that began in the late 1980s demanding democracy in the repressive state. In recent months, Myanmar’s military government has again cracked down on widespread protests and calls for democracy.
Mr. Cooper also visited Somalia in 1992 during the early stages of famine that gripped the African nation and Rwanda during the genocide that wiped out nearly one million people in a matter of 100 days.
“I may have gone to Yale but I feel like I was educated in the streets of Somalia, Sarajevo, and South Africa and Rwanda and the places where the boundaries aren’t clear, where the dark parts of the human heart are open for all to see,” he said.
“In Rwanda, I learned that all of us are really capable of anything. We’re capable of terrible acts of horror and brutality but also acts of compassion and kindness,” he added. “In wars, you see those as well. The choice, I learned, is really up to each of us. We can choose how we want to react to a situation.”
He also shared his views on Iraq, which he described as the “most challenging assignment there is today.” After 4 visits to the country, he believes the government has a long way to go before any internal stability can be sustained.
“While the violence is down and there are certainly hopeful signs and military progress, political progress - which everyone admits is the key to stability - has not occurred,” he said.
Mr. Cooper also got some laughs from the crowd while discussing a recent democratic presidential candidate debate that he hosted over YouTube and candidates’ attempts to get called on for questions.
He described Hilary Clinton’s look as a “teacher who knows you forgot your homework,” John Edward’s subtle finger motions and Dennis Kucinich’s frantic arm waving. He will also host a YouTube Republican candidate debate on November 28.
Speaking on Hurricane Katrina, Mr. Cooper told personalized stories of tragedy and loss. He also criticized the response from the government after witnessing the devastation firsthand.
“Every night in my ear, I would hear politicians thanking one another and talking about the tremendous relief effort that was underway and the unprecedented and unpredictable disaster this was,” he said. “And it was stunning because this may have been unprecedented but it certainly wasn’t unpredicted. And when you spend all day seeing bodies and destruction and there are no armies or national guardsman in site, to hear them praising one another was pretty infuriating.”
Believing strongly in the importance of objective journalism, he criticized opinionated news anchors and slanted coverage by reporters.
“As a newscaster, I believe in facts, I don’t believe in opinion … I think that viewers want facts and information and armed with that, they’re smart enough to make up their own minds.”
Mr. Cooper is the host of “Anderson Cooper 360” on CNN and last year became a correspondent for the CBS show 60 Minutes. His memoirs, Dispatches from the Edge, topped the New York Times bestseller list in June 2006.
Some of his awards include an Emmy for his coverage of Princess Diana’s funeral, a Silver Plaque from the Chicago International Film Festival for coverage of the Bosnian civil war and was voted media person of the year in 2005 in an annual online poll.
Mr. Cooper ended his talk by urging the student audience to “follow your bliss,” a piece of advice his mother gave him upon graduating from college.
“It's only when you figure out what you’re truly passionate about that you are going to be able to be a success in that,” he said.
Thanks for visiting - hope you enjoyed the weekend!!
No comments:
Post a Comment