The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » How anyone with a brain....... (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Daryl -the other brother wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Randwill wrote:

Did El Chapo have control of what was published?


From what I heard, (Fox News) El Chapo had final approval before the article was published.

Just don't think Fox News exposed any big secret. Rolling Stone openly admitted from the start that the article was sent to El Chapo in advance of publication, and added that no changes were requested. This is what the Rolling Stone says at the start of the article:

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/feat......20160109

"Disclosure: Some names have had
 to be changed, locations not named, and an understanding was brokered with the subject that this piece would be submitted for the subject's approval before publication. The subject did not ask for any changes."
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
From one of my local (i.e. Canadian) national newspapers:

"Sean Penn's El Chapo interview raises ethical red flag"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/sean......8113770/

Short excerpts for those too lazy to click the link:

An editor's note atop the article informs readers that "an understanding was brokered with the subject that this piece would be submitted for the subject's approval before publication. The subject did not ask for any changes."

To many journalists, this is anathema, because it can cause a reporter to pull punches, to soften a story to ensure that it passes muster with the subject.

It is, clearly, a piece of propaganda, and many outlets would blanch at publishing it. But popular outlets regularly offer platforms to material that is potentially far more damaging. For many years, Al Jazeera was considered to be a dependable mouthpiece for the Taliban, which regularly saw its videos air unedited on that Qatar-based network. Last winter, Fox News posted the entire 22-minute video, made by the propaganda arm of the Islamic State, of the live immolation of a Jordanian pilot.

We live in a media environment in which news outlets are forced to do an ever-more-delicate dance with subjects. Like IS, El Chapo himself could have uploaded his interview; outlets around the world would have breathlessly reposted it, with nary a concern about ethics.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
stoneunhinged
View Profile
Inner circle
3079 Posts

Profile of stoneunhinged
Everyone usually ignores my comments. It's just Jeff, and he's "unhinged". But if Sean Penn CAN'T WRITE, and if Rolling Stone CAN'T EDIT, it means something. I'm not sure what it means. But it runs just a wee bit deeper than partisan politics. It's as if we don't even pretend to understand what journalism means anymore. A "journalist" is someone who...what?

It reminds me of the porn star who chose to accuse her ex-boyfriend of rape. She used Twitter. Nasty story, and I believe that she was raped, but...TWITTER?

Are there any standards left regarding how we want to present information and be taken seriously?

This isn't really about Rolling Stone; it's about what outlets--and which people use (or are invited to use) those outlets--are available these days. Where does a thinking human being go to be informed?

If Sean Penn is a really poor writer (and he is), but doesn't get edited (which anyone who thinks he or she is a writer WANTS to get), then what are we supposed to think about what he has to say?

It's creepy new world.
Randwill
View Profile
Inner circle
1915 Posts

Profile of Randwill
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:

Just what qualifications does one need to ask questions anyhow?

I would say that there are indeed qualifications for one to ask questions. A familiarity with the subject would be one. The ability to cut through spin and ask pertinent follow-up questions would also be important. The ability to bring out aspects of the interviewee's personality that he or she might want to keep hidden is another quality that an effective questioner would possess.
Tom Cutts
View Profile
Staff
Northern CA
5761 Posts

Profile of Tom Cutts
Quote:
On Jan 11, 2016, Bob1Dog wrote:
.... can still call Rolling Stone a legitimate publication is beyond me. A new low point for them.

http://news.yahoo.com/sean-penn-el-chapo......647.html


Bob, where did you see it referred to as such?
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, stoneunhinged wrote:
Everyone usually ignores my comments. It's just Jeff, and he's "unhinged". But if Sean Penn CAN'T WRITE, and if Rolling Stone CAN'T EDIT, it means something. I'm not sure what it means. But it runs just a wee bit deeper than partisan politics. It's as if we don't even pretend to understand what journalism means anymore. A "journalist" is someone who...what?

It reminds me of the porn star who chose to accuse her ex-boyfriend of rape. She used Twitter. Nasty story, and I believe that she was raped, but...TWITTER?

Are there any standards left regarding how we want to present information and be taken seriously?

This isn't really about Rolling Stone; it's about what outlets--and which people use (or are invited to use) those outlets--are available these days. Where does a thinking human being go to be informed?

If Sean Penn is a really poor writer (and he is), but doesn't get edited (which anyone who thinks he or she is a writer WANTS to get), then what are we supposed to think about what he has to say?

It's creepy new world.


I think a lot of us can remember a time when journalists at least pretended to be unbiased and objective and just reported the facts as known. Opinions were kept strictly to the editorial pages.

Now what passes for news is either a thinly veiled opinion piece, or an outright ad.

Today there are so many sources, all with their own agenda, that you have to wade through all of it to glean the actual facts.

My problem with the piece is that he met with a wanted criminal, showing no regard for the law.

America's culpability in creating the problems it now, pretends, to fight is moot in this context.

The man is a monster, and it's the obligation of any moral person to see he's apprehended, not used for propaganda, or to keep a b-list has been from fading away completely
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Daryl -the other brother
View Profile
Special user
Chicago
594 Posts

Profile of Daryl -the other brother
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Randwill wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Daryl -the other brother wrote:
El Chapo is a businessman first,” Penn writes, “and only resorts to violence when he deems it advantageous to himself or his business interests.”


As far as the quote from Penn that you cite, I don't understand why you find it objectionable.


Really??? So you agree kidnapping and murder are justified if it is advantageous to you or your business?
magicfish
View Profile
Inner circle
6319 Posts

Profile of magicfish
Tough crowd.
Anyway, this is definitely a stain on Penn's career.
Randwill
View Profile
Inner circle
1915 Posts

Profile of Randwill
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Daryl -the other brother wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Randwill wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Daryl -the other brother wrote:
El Chapo is a businessman first,” Penn writes, “and only resorts to violence when he deems it advantageous to himself or his business interests.”


As far as the quote from Penn that you cite, I don't understand why you find it objectionable.


Really??? So you agree kidnapping and murder are justified if it is advantageous to you or your business?

No I don't. But it's something that Penn learned from talking to El Chapo and he reported it. It is important to keep the message and the messenger (and me) separate.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
817 Posts

Profile of acesover
Does anyone here really believe El Chapo should stand trial? This may sound harsh. But he should be put down like a mad dog that he is. Is there any doubt of his guilt? Is he responsible for multiple deaths and misery in the world? Does anyone believe he is innocent? He is no more innocent that Hitler or Bin Laden. Maybe he can say he had a bad childhood and the jury will let him off. RANT...
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
Bob1Dog
View Profile
Inner circle
Wife: It's me or this houseful of
1159 Posts

Profile of Bob1Dog
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Tom Cutts wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 11, 2016, Bob1Dog wrote:
.... can still call Rolling Stone a legitimate publication is beyond me. A new low point for them.

http://news.yahoo.com/sean-penn-el-chapo......647.html


Bob, where did you see it referred to as such?


:-) A regular contributor in here who backed away from NVMS awhile back argued that Rolling Stone was a legitimate publication. Now, I suppose one might parse the word "legitimate." Smile
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about? Smile

My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums.
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
What difference does it make if RS is "legitimate" or where the interview was published?

The issue to me is - was Penn's actions illegal, and if so what is to be done about him.

As to Aces contention that this monster doesn't deserve to live, I agree. However, he was tried and convicted in Mexico and jailed.

Hopefully he will be extradited to the US and maybe a different result will happen.
Saying that makes me uneasy, because I believe that he was able to exist due to the ridiculous "war on drugs", which has failed miserably.

Unless of course you're a druglord, a weapons manufacturer or pharmaceutical company, or their shareholders.

That, plus the fact dealing with murderers by murdering cannot be good for humanity in the long run.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Tom Cutts
View Profile
Staff
Northern CA
5761 Posts

Profile of Tom Cutts
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Bob1Dog wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Tom Cutts wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 11, 2016, Bob1Dog wrote:
.... can still call Rolling Stone a legitimate publication is beyond me. A new low point for them.

http://news.yahoo.com/sean-penn-el-chapo......647.html


Bob, where did you see it referred to as such?


:-) A regular contributor in here who backed away from NVMS awhile back argued that Rolling Stone was a legitimate publication. Now, I suppose one might parse the word "legitimate." Smile


I would agree it's a legit publication. Not so much a hard hitting journalistic source though. Yet, every once in a while they get a winner.

I wonder what reaction would be if this piece were submitted by a small time real world journalist and conducted in a U.S. prison.
Bob1Dog
View Profile
Inner circle
Wife: It's me or this houseful of
1159 Posts

Profile of Bob1Dog
Once again, "legitimate" being the operative word. Some simple definitions of it:

1. Allowed according to rules or laws.
2. Real, accepted or official
3. Fair or reasonable.

I think we can all agree that RS is legitimate according to definition. However, fair and reasonable are words that come to mind with RS, whereby one might use the word "legitimate" with a bit of sarcasm implied. That was my intent in the OP, but I now see that was probably the wrong word to use. Perhaps, fair, acceptable, or some similar word in order to not confuse folks.

I'm not a RS reader but they've had enough negative press in the last several years for me to question their status as a magazine, or well just another rag.

There, that's put to bed.

The real issues here have already been established. Penn, El Chapo, and Rolling Stone.

As to your final question, I believe a "real journalist" conducting the interview in a US prison would be more than acceptable as far as I'm concerned. There would be no question of "legitimacy," a. because the thug is in prison where he should be, not in some hideout evading capture, and b., as long as the journalist conducted himself/herself professionally. With regard to professionalism, the following might be an interesting read:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/11/opinions/r......terview/

:-)
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about? Smile

My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums.
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
Did Penn break the law by dealing with a fugitive, with no intention of seeing him brought to justice?

The legitimacy of the publication is moot. But let's not miss an opportunity to bicker over minutia.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Tom Jorgenson
View Profile
Inner circle
LOOSE ANGLES, CALIFORNIA
4452 Posts

Profile of Tom Jorgenson
If Penn wrote the article, Penn can claim journalistic privilege. Even though that would make more than a few journalists gag, the claim could stick.

Has El Chapo been found guilty of anything within the US court system? If not, another loophole. It's not Penn's role to assume Judge or Cop status. Personally, I'd assume the US has a lot of warrants out for this slimeball. If I were Penn, I would not inform anyone of the interview or its location...who needs flying bullets from foreign military during an interview? Plus, the repercussions and revenge might be a bit dicey for Penn if he actually set the guy up for a takedown.

Can't wait to pass on the movie.
We dance an invisible dance to music they cannot hear.
TonyB2009
View Profile
Inner circle
5006 Posts

Profile of TonyB2009
Quote:
On Jan 12, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
Just what qualifications does one need to ask questions anyhow?

I can understand why a layman might think that. But the truth is that journalists are highly trained, and ask questions in a systematic effort to get at some truth. It is different from a layperson asking questions. Take that from someone who spend more than a decade in the business.

Rolling Stone are up front that this was given to El Chapo for final approval. Thus it is not journalism. Not even a distant relation of journalism.

It is also badly written. Thus it is not literature.

Not journalism. Not literature. What is the point?
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » How anyone with a brain....... (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.2 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL