Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
1. Rather is a real journalist. 2. The WH did not encourage (hire?) Rather to create favorable "news". 3. Rather's faux pas was plastered all over the media, Gannon's wasn't.
|
Could it be that Rather's "journalism" affected a national presiudential race? Isn't that more newsworthy? And oh, what exactly makes a real journalist? If you're gonna talk about first class investigating and objectivity, Dan Rather doesn;t make the cut
Quote:
|
Yep. Lewinsky was plastered all over the media, just like Gannon would be if he had been hired by dems.
|
It was finally, but the media went kicking and screaming. So you're saying that the Boston still would have assigned two investigative reporters if there was a Dem in office? No offense, but if you believe that, you're living in a parallel universe