Soldier censored just before giving support to Ron Paul.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by FrostedxB, Jan 4, 2012.

  1. FrostedxB

    FrostedxB Tank

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    5
    Just saw this video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TSxm2V8aVQ

    Made me go huh, what a coincidence.

    Supposedly they came back to him later on but I haven't seen any video of it yet. Dunno what to really think of it, were they REALLY trying to censor something or did CNN actually lose the feed. No one in the room seemed too concerned as they jumped over to Romney news.
     
  2. morgs

    morgs The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    309
    Apparently this happens a lot in political based interviews.
     
  3. Bad^Hat

    Bad^Hat The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    19,989
    Likes Received:
    437
    Wow they couldn't have been more obvious about this. The reporter interviewing him blinks her second set of eyelids twice a milisecond before it cuts, obvious lizardry going on here.
     
  4. Krynn72

    Krynn72 The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    26,073
    Likes Received:
    710
    I'm not seeing it. Why would they specifically interview someone at Ron Paul's camp just to cut him off? Looked like technical difficulties to me. :/

    Also, how could you see her eyelids when she was facing the other way?
     
  5. Bad^Hat

    Bad^Hat The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    19,989
    Likes Received:
    437
    I've said too much.
     
  6. MuToiD_MaN

    MuToiD_MaN The Freeman

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Messages:
    4,510
    Likes Received:
    190
    Interest in this article dropped steeply after I read the last two words of your topic title.
     
  7. Yuri

    Yuri Tank

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    5,365
    Likes Received:
    2
    tin foil hats, get em here, get em cheap! tin foil hats everybody!
     
  8. RakuraiTenjin

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,112
    Likes Received:
    1
    Because as long as it ain't our guy, we'll still call it ethical journalism, am i rite?!
     
  9. MuToiD_MaN

    MuToiD_MaN The Freeman

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Messages:
    4,510
    Likes Received:
    190
    No it's unethical alright, I just can't be bothered to wharrgarbl about it.
     
  10. Stigmata

    Stigmata The Freeman

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    Messages:
    15,914
    Likes Received:
    326
    Because of who it supports?
     
  11. MuToiD_MaN

    MuToiD_MaN The Freeman

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Messages:
    4,510
    Likes Received:
    190
    Alright, I should clarify. I first came in here just to be all "Noone cares about Ron Paul lool" but really, after observing the video for myself, it appears to be an unfortunate technical difficulty. I would think that the point he was making has already been said all over the place, not to mention by Paul himself, which would hypothetically remove any motivation to "silence the dissident." Just a glitch, that's how I saw it. It doesn't surprise me that Ron Paul supporters are going to see it as an intentional act, just as I might be inclined to think so if a liberal interviewee were similarly interrupted on Fox News. So let Ron Paul supporters wharrgarbl about it, but perhaps because of my bias, I just don't see it that way.
     
  12. Krynn72

    Krynn72 The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    26,073
    Likes Received:
    710
    The thing is, Ron Paul supporters often do jump to conspiracy theories about how the media is intentionally ignoring them and Ron Paul. And that's not entirely without cause, since it is quite apparent that there's an intentional lack of coverage on him, but this situation isn't an example of it. I'm with Mutoid, its not surprising that people would see it that way, but I'm not going to get upset about this particular incident. Getting upset about the general lack of coverage is a valid thing though, and I could get behind that.
     
  13. Maestro

    Maestro The Freeman

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    111
    Has anyone seen the Daily Show segment about how the media ignored and continues to ignore Ron Paul? It's a very real phenomenon. He scares them because he doesn't tow the party line.
     
  14. kineaesth

    kineaesth Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Apparently he was cut off not to censor his support of Ron Paul or what have you, but because he was violating the Army's Military Conduct Code - soldiers in uniform are not allowed to give political opinion or portray any political opinions as those of the army in general.
     
  15. Bad^Hat

    Bad^Hat The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    19,989
    Likes Received:
    437
    Toe.

    char
     
  16. Krynn72

    Krynn72 The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    26,073
    Likes Received:
    710
    Nope, republicans tow the line with their Dodge Ram trucks with Hemi engines, like real Americans do.
     
  17. Stigmata

    Stigmata The Freeman

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    Messages:
    15,914
    Likes Received:
    326
    Toeing lines is for commies. Real Americans go all the way
     
  18. Maestro

    Maestro The Freeman

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    111
    I'm not kidding when I say this is the exact image that will come to mind forever more when I think of Republicans and partisan votes. Regardless, w and e are next to each other on the keyboard, my bad.
     
  19. Raziaar

    Raziaar I Hate Custom Titles

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Messages:
    29,759
    Likes Received:
    132
    It's true! You can't express an opinion about the people who send you to war indefinitely.
     
  20. RakuraiTenjin

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,112
    Likes Received:
    1
    That's still not right for cutting off a privately owned newsfeed. If it was government mandated feed cut, then that's unjust censorship. If it's the network purposely cutting the feed on their own, then that's terrible journalistic integrity and unethical. Let the man speak his mind, and if he is in violation of any rules it's a matter for the Uniform Code of Military Justie and that soldier to sort out later, not the feds censoring private news.
     
  21. kineaesth

    kineaesth Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's CNN. I'm pretty sure that they'd err on the side of cutting off anything that was breaking a broadcasting law. Cutting off that feed meant protecting both them and the soldier speaking.
     
  22. Bad^Hat

    Bad^Hat The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    19,989
    Likes Received:
    437
    Maybe this is a naive question, but if it's against regulations for soldiers to voice political opinions, and CNN is concerned about this, then why'd they ****ing ask him for it?
     
  23. kineaesth

    kineaesth Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    The journalist holding the microphone that is shown on television is not representative of CNN as a whole. This journalist is certainly not the producer of the show, and has very little to do with the team of people that will necessarily be involved in dealing with the ramifications of a broadcast broaching some set of standards. Whether or not the journalist is at fault is completely arbitrary, because in a live setting a question about politics in general could very easily lead to the person being interviewed giving a completely separate answer.

    The crux of this cutoff, if it was indeed a manual censorship of the feed, is that if a code of conduct for the US Army was breached, CNN would prefer to not be a possible accessory to this act.
     
  24. RakuraiTenjin

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,112
    Likes Received:
    1
    CNN is not subject to the UCMJ. The soldier is. The military's rules or wishes have no bearing on what CNN may or may not do. The UCMJ is not law applicable to civilians. There is no broadcasting law to be broken in that situation- it's terrible journalistic integrity.

    Example: I get drunk and get a soldier drunk who is on duty. He is subject to punishment under the UCMJ. I am not, nor can I be charged as an accessory to his UCMJ violation or anything like that. Only if I was another military enlisted/officer.
     
  25. kineaesth

    kineaesth Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    While legally/technically that may be true (I do not know - I find most of the literature on this topic incomprehensible without my law-student partner there to translate), I believe that the producers in charge of monitoring a live feed would not be able or allowed to make split-second decisions regarding the absolute legality of the content they are producing, and would have mandated procedures which would, again, err on the side of caution
     
  26. Stigmata

    Stigmata The Freeman

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    Messages:
    15,914
    Likes Received:
    326
    "Folly is the cloak of knavery."
     
  27. RakuraiTenjin

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,112
    Likes Received:
    1
    I honestly think it was done to limit Paul publicity by the producers. Anyone with common sense knows you are not subject to military rules unless you're IN the military.
     
  28. Krynn72

    Krynn72 The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    26,073
    Likes Received:
    710
    I honestly think you're foolish for thinking that. Anyone with common sense knows that a news organization wouldn't have sent their reporters to a Ron Paul event and air a live interview only to then censor any support for Ron Paul. Its like driving out to a store so you can buy some delicious pistachio nuts, only to then park in the parking lot, not get out, and immediately drive back home. Nobody would do something like that unless there were extenuating circumstances.
     
  29. RakuraiTenjin

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,112
    Likes Received:
    1
    Claim media coverage being given without actualy allowing good word out for the candidate. I'm not saying there's some big organized conspiracy, it's just behavior I'd expect more from producers at MSNBC towards a candidate with these political views.

    It's really not all that crazy or wild to happen, nor does there need to be some big organized effort to do so. It's that predominately left wing media 'coddling' culture. Romney and Obama are the mainstream media's babies, they dont want any coverage to taint them right now (by taint, I dont mean negative press, I mean to get less coverage/ratings)
     
  30. Stigmata

    Stigmata The Freeman

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    Messages:
    15,914
    Likes Received:
    326
    Rakurai, you have an odd habit of being correct up to the point where you start blaming things on "the left-wing [thing]". In this case, it's incumbent corporate greed vs political freedom, not the left wing vs a Republican candidate - especially when Paul is arguably more left-wing than any other candidate in the race.

    You blame it on the left wing in one sentence, and in the next you clump together Obama with Romney as the idols of the media. Your logic doesn't fit.
     
  31. morgs

    morgs The Freeman

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    309
    I also think it was intentional, there's been a Ron Paul blackout in the news for a long time now.
     
  32. CptStern

    CptStern suckmonkey

    Joined:
    May 5, 2004
    Messages:
    10,321
    Likes Received:
    46
    that would imply he has a snowballs chance in hell of winning the republican nomination
     
  33. Wanted Bob

    Wanted Bob Companion Cube

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,209
    Likes Received:
    39
    This is something I've been really confused by. I dont consider myself to be at all knowledgeable when it comes to american politics, but the policies of Ron Paul seem to totally go against the party he is representing. Am I missing something here?
     
  34. RakuraiTenjin

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,112
    Likes Received:
    1
    It's because I do a poor job of representing what I mean to say or rather what I tend to look at as conventional wisdom. I just tend to believe the idea of coddling candidates grows from these MSM outlets traditionally sheltering left wing candidates (with the sole exception of Fox News, which swings the same but the other direction.) However, during the primary for Republicans, they use that developed skillset to highlight whoever brings them the most ratings (since none of the candidates are 'left wing') when really the reporting should be focused on the best debate/voting/political performer.

    I think he's got a decent shot this year. If he had fair media coverage I think right now we'd just be waiting for Paul vs Obama in November. Just wait until California and states like it hold their primary, I expect some striking Ron Paul wins. I also expect him to consistently place 2nd around the entire country, while Romney, Santorum, etc will place 1st in some states, yet 5th in others, etc.

    Wrong. Of the two parties, they are closest to the Republican Party platform. They don't match totally, but they're closer to Republican than Democrat. Now- matching the party platform and tradition vs matching what Republican candidates and Presidents/Congress have done recently are two different matters entirely.
     
  35. CptStern

    CptStern suckmonkey

    Joined:
    May 5, 2004
    Messages:
    10,321
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ross Perot had a snowball's chance in hell as well
     

Share This Page