Correct the News Media on Heckler Story

One question (0.00 / 0)

What broadcast was this?  The 11pm?  That's the one I'd like to recommend they make their corrective statement on (plus all the ones between now and then).

Obviously, they could just issue a statement during a lunchtime news show when nobody is watching, and that hardly undoes any of their damage, jumping the gun and then denying they did.

Thanks for digitizing this, the quality isn't bad at all.

|Spazeboy.net|Spazeboy's Guide to Political Videoblogging|

---

by: spazeboy @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 09:48:36 AM CDT

Monday 11 pm news n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: mikect @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 09:51:52 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Also on morning news? (0.00 / 0)

Another watcher says WFSB said the same thing this morning.

---

by: mikect @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 10:08:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Everytime the debate is re-aired, a superimposed retraction is needed (4.00 / 1)

Joe Lieberman comes out swinging at Ned  for lying and makes an unfounded, harmful public accusation in the debate that Lamont supporters were disrupting the debate.  If that is not a lie, I don't know what is.  Ned's reputation is at stake and he needs to call the TV station and Lieberman for the bag job that this is and demand an apology. 

I also do not feel it would be inappropriate for George S to have said, "We don't have the facts on this."

His passionate call for civil dialogue and his desire to run a principled campaign is clear to everyone who has followed him over time, but needs to be aggressively defended.  this can't be left to the media to manage.

Ned needs to make his deliberative process transparent when something like this happens. He needs to say he is in favor of civil dialogue.  He can say that hot heads must not prevail and unfairly accuse others in the absence of the facts.  If he says nothing, it looks like he thinks it's his people.

In an age where habeas corpus is history and people can be detained without knowing why, Ned has the right cool head and orientation toward fairness and the facts before flying off the handle --  and Joe doesn't demonstrate it, though he postures that he has this deliberative quality. 

There is a fraternity hazing quality to negative campaigning that has little to do with doing the job, and yet these "unscripted moments" do show a lot of what the candidates are made out of, as opposed to what they explain of themselves to the press and the public.

---

by: greenpeas @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 10:10:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

DONE. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: OscarTheGrouch @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 10:27:25 AM CDT

No retraction at noon (0.00 / 0)

No retraction on the noon WFSB news, and they didn't identify the hecklers as either Lamont or LaRouche supporters.

---

by: mikect @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 11:07:09 AM CDT

Done. (0.00 / 0)

Good job Mikect.

I believe that time wounds all heels. -John Lennon

---

by: Mom @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 11:35:14 AM CDT

WNPR on the debate (0.00 / 0)

WNPR FM devoted a chunk of their story (mp3) to the heckling.  The story said Lieberman and Lamont "exchanged some heated words on stage" (sort of correct, if incomplete) and that the "protestors said they were not affiliated with any candidate"  (not necessarily damaging to Lamont, but wrong).

---

by: mikect @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 12:33:58 PM CDT

I listened to WTNH last night at 11:00 (0.00 / 0)

and THEY reported the hecklers were supposedly not connected with any of the 3 candidates campaigns.

At least that was something.

I did email both of the other 2 stations.

---

by: PamB @ Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 13:37:20 PM CDT

Video of the LaRouchites at debate (0.00 / 0)

Video of LaRouche nuts singing in the debate and being thrown out by a Lamont staff person.

---

by: mikect @ Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 10:15:38 AM CDT

Thirdparty (0.00 / 0)

..who also writes the Lamont Blog.

---

by: Scarce @ Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 12:59:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]