CNN suddenly cares about obnoxious Twitter posts?

---

On the other hand, who cares what I or any other opinionated American news viewer thinks about Hezbollah or Grand Ayatollahs? What's the point of TV news, or any news, if it's precisely calibrated to soothe my niggling biases? CNN's job is to provide a broad variety of information and perspectives. That means listening to people who may annoy me.

If a Christian female journalist (Nasr) from a religiously fractured country (Lebanon) finds something to admire in a prominent Shi'ite cleric from the same country, that's a little bit interesting. Not earth-shatteringly important, but considerably more insightful than the countless stupid stories that dismiss Fadlallah by erroneously implying or flat-out stating he was an executive member of Hezbollah.

Although I don't care one way or another if Nasr's employed at CNN, I do wish the network would clarify and codify its policy on perceived bias, as well as controversial off-air comments. Being associated with one "side" of a conflict in the Middle East isn't automatically a fireable offense at CNN. Wolf Blitzer used to work for AIPAC - an American lobbying group that attacks all public critics of Israel's military and settlement policies. If expressing nuanced admiration for Fadlallah "compromises" Nasr's "credibility" as a journalist, then Blitzer's credibility never existed. To be clear, I'm not trashing Wolf Blitzer. I'm simply noting he doesn't appear to be in compliance with CNN's Nasr Credibility Standard.

http://clatl.com/freshloaf/archives/2010/07/08/cnn-suddenly-cares-about-obnoxious-twitter-posts

At least, it appears to be.

---

But I don't watch TV much, and I never get my news there. Most of what passes for news in broadcast sources is either gossip or thinly disguised advertising anyway.

I didn't know that. It sure makes your point.

for reasons to fire people..