Wow, that's interesting -
Nov. 6th, 2003 07:43 amThe same story, but watch the spin -
( Democrats Caught in Apparent Hypocrisy on Intelligence Politics )
Okay, the same story - from another source:
( Republican and Democratic Panel Leaders Take Feud to the Senate Floor )
The first source is from crosswalk.com - the second, from the New York Times.
Yanno, it's times like this I'm glad I got my journalism experience during the Reagan years. The first story, though well-written, is terribly one-sided. The second one is almost a clone of the first, except for its depth in covering both sides of the issue, and staying on the mark for what the real problem is about.
My professor would have smacked my hands, maybe my head with a paper fan ala Sanzo and sent me back to the typewriter to do a better job of it - or discount me as a total idiot and give the story to someone else to write. You stay out of it, as a reporter. YOU. STAY. OUT. You don't get to decide who should get the attention - you have to give both sides equal time. Not equal weight - which the second story did better. It's kind of lame to be asking where they got the memo when the contents are so inflammatory - don't you think?
The Dems are on the fence for putting a plan to oust Bush on paper - even if it was only a draft. The Repubs are on the fence for having that piece of paper, which wasn't common knowledge, published or distributed. How did it come to light?
Somebody who needed to sell soap.
Come to your own conclusions. I'm filing this under "knowing your enemy" - good grief, who would be surprised about anything to unseat or keep seated the existing administration?
( Democrats Caught in Apparent Hypocrisy on Intelligence Politics )
Okay, the same story - from another source:
( Republican and Democratic Panel Leaders Take Feud to the Senate Floor )
The first source is from crosswalk.com - the second, from the New York Times.
Yanno, it's times like this I'm glad I got my journalism experience during the Reagan years. The first story, though well-written, is terribly one-sided. The second one is almost a clone of the first, except for its depth in covering both sides of the issue, and staying on the mark for what the real problem is about.
My professor would have smacked my hands, maybe my head with a paper fan ala Sanzo and sent me back to the typewriter to do a better job of it - or discount me as a total idiot and give the story to someone else to write. You stay out of it, as a reporter. YOU. STAY. OUT. You don't get to decide who should get the attention - you have to give both sides equal time. Not equal weight - which the second story did better. It's kind of lame to be asking where they got the memo when the contents are so inflammatory - don't you think?
The Dems are on the fence for putting a plan to oust Bush on paper - even if it was only a draft. The Repubs are on the fence for having that piece of paper, which wasn't common knowledge, published or distributed. How did it come to light?
Somebody who needed to sell soap.
Come to your own conclusions. I'm filing this under "knowing your enemy" - good grief, who would be surprised about anything to unseat or keep seated the existing administration?