This is particularly for treeman and others who would know. MSNBC has been trashing Geraldo all night, part of it is bitterness, since they have also trashed FOX, but they constantly say that Geraldo's pictures gave away information and could be used to directly kill soldiers. MSNBC stopped short of accusing FOX and Geraldo of treason and crimes against the country. The question is, were Geraldo's pictures really THAT bad? Could they have been used by the enemy to kill soldiers like MSNBC has bee claiming, or is this a case of MSNBC taking a chance to sling dirt towards FOX? I just find it suspicious that they take this chance to attack FOX since FOX has been getting credited for some of the best war coverage.
What I read on CNN was that Geraldo had drawn a map in the sand that showed, what an miffed military official called, the "big picture stuff." Basically saying that he was giving away parts of the war plan. The CNN article also said that Fox and the Military reached an agreement for him to leave on his own. They also had quotes of Geraldo saying that it was BS and that "rats" over had MSNBC were stabbing him in the back and what not. I hope I can find out what happened, I'm curious as hell.
Well, I just did a quick search on google and found this from the Washington Post. Geraldo Rivera 'Volunteered' to Leave Iraq By Steve Gorman Reuters Wednesday, April 2, 2003; Page C07 LOS ANGELES, April 1 -- A day after the Pentagon demanded he leave the war zone in Iraq for divulging U.S. troop positions in a broadcast, maverick television reporter Geraldo Rivera has "volunteered" to leave the country, the Fox News Channel said today. Rivera, who was traveling with the Army's 101st Airborne Division, ran afoul of military commanders with a live report on Sunday in which he sketched a map in the sand to show viewers his relative location in Iraq and where troops might advance next. Pentagon officials said Monday that Rivera's report "compromised operational security" of the Army unit and that at the insistence of the field commanders, Fox News had agreed to remove him from the war zone. Rivera himself later suggested all was well between him and the military and accused his competitors at former employer NBC of "spreading some lies" about him. Fox, a unit of News Corp. Ltd. and the top-rated all-news cable network in the United States, had initially maintained that the matter was under review with the Pentagon. The veteran correspondent, known for his provocative on-screen style, was not officially "embedded" with the 101st Airborne -- a status by which journalists accompany U.S. troops while adhering to certain ground rules designed to safeguard military security. But he was permitted to join up with the unit from Kuwait after the war began and had been accorded "ad hoc embedded" treatment, a Fox News spokesman said. Late today, the network issued a statement saying Rivera's brief stint in Iraq was over for now. "Geraldo Rivera volunteered to return to Kuwait from his embedment with U.S. troops after learning of concerns that he may have inadvertently violated the rules governing embedded journalists," the statement said. "Given those concerns, Fox News and Geraldo thought it better he return to Kuwait while the situation is reviewed. Fox News believes that Geraldo did not knowingly disregard the rules of embedment." A Fox spokesman said Rivera was expected to leave the country first thing Wednesday morning, but no details were available as to the means of his departure. © 2003 The Washington Post Company http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6564-2003Apr1.html
I don't know if any of you watch Conan O'Brien, but his skits "with" Geraldo are so funny! Anyhow, I think he's leaving because he annoyed the hell out of the troops. The Pentagon was just waiting for him to screw up so that they could ship him out. He annoys the hell out of me, but at least I can change the channel or press mute. Our military men and women didn't have that luxury.
I heard of this the other day... Pretty funny stuff...I think it was just an excuse to get his azz out of there...I can't believe this hack is still on...He annoys the crap out of me and I can't stand the p*rn stach'
Geraldo is a real journalist my a**. He is just a puppet who was hired because his name has selling power and credibility from his ill fated Geraldo Rivera talk show. I wonder why FOX has gotten some of the best coverage of the war.... oh wait, they are drastically conservative, and since most conservatives are "hawks" who support drastic use of the military, it would stand to reason that the U.S. Government, who is policing the news that can be shown from Iraq right now, would let FOX get the best coverage since they would show the kind of footage they want portrayed to the American public. FOX News has no credibility, and they might as well just throw out their dumb slogan of fair and balanced news, because they are the most slanted form of news in America right now. I don't support a certain TV news provider over another, but the "liberal" media doesn't dare make it so blatantly obvious that they are liberal reporters. FOX News on the other hand, goes out of its way to be biased. Back to Geraldo, this man has no business being employed as a journalist. It's embarrassing to the industry that FOX News does so, even though it's quite embarrassing that FOX News even exists. Bottom line: Take away all of Rupert Murdoch's fortune so we wouldn't have to deal with FOX News and the O' Malley's would still run the Dodgers. Even though I don't like the Dodgers, that selling was not right.
[sung to "Who Let the Dogs Out?"] Who let the liberal conspiracy theorists out? Woof! Woof! Woofwoof! Who let the liberal conspiracy theorists out? Woof! Woof! Woofwoof! Geez. You sound REALLY bitter that a conservative news channel is winning the war coverage ratings battle. People don't have to watch Fox News, but they are. Living in America, we've got lots of alternative war coverage here. Go watch CNN, MSNBC, BBC, or the big networks. Go read the New York Times, Washington Post, Houston Chronicle, Time magazine, Newsweek, etc. Heck, put on the radio for all I care. Stop complaining about ONE freaking outlet of information. This... is... not... a... conspiracy...
I heard it had to do with trying to please the people of Iraq. The US government is trying to show kindness and goodwill to the civilians, and felt removing Geraldo would help with public opinion in the country. On a related subject, public opinon of the US government actions improved when Rivera left the US. While Fox claims it was a coincidence, the White House has requested that the network send him to France in retaliation for their not supporting the war effort. Seriously though -- He drew a map in the sand stating that the division was 'here', and would be moving 'here' and attacking 'this division' in two hours. If that's not giving away troop positions and intentions, I don't know what is.
I had a long response typed out for you VesceySux, but I'll sum up my main points in outline form. A) Fox News is winning the ratings war because of political ideology. One on hand they are the source that would give the U.S. Military the image they want to see in wartime. On the other, they identify with the majority of Americans that want to see America kicking butt and not the other way around. As far as military censorship goes, it all started in Vietnam. Many people believe media coverage lost the Vietnam War. That is why there are numerous restrictions on journalists during wartime now. At least in this war, journalists get to go along with military units, they didn't have that luxury in the first gulf war 10 years ago or so. But still, reporters now get close to those troops and it isn't easy to put that completely aside and write negative things about them if it arises. So, this method still influences media coverage big time. B) My opinions on Journalism are wide reaching. I disliked ESPN hiring Tim Hardaway for NBA broadcasts when obviously there were many more qualified reporters available, but they didn't have the same name or selling power as he did. This is extremely similar to my view on Geraldo Rivera being hired by FOX News. Also, I dislike the way women are portrayed as news anchors. Most of them have short and usually blond hair. At UT alone, I know numerous friends of mine who have already drastically chopped off their hair, and while I don't know the real reasons why, I wouldn't doubt the prevaling image of women in TV played a role in their thinking. I also just did a story about reaction to CBS's decision to pull footage of the 5 American POW's captured in Iraq off the air as soon as they got it. C) I am a Journalism student at UT so this kind of stuff hits me very close to home. Junior majoring in broadcast journalism actually, who wants to be a kickass sports reporter in the future. D) I dislike FOX News because of their methods, nothing else. Their slogan is "fair and balanced" and anybody who has watched a minute of them, knows it is the farthest thing from the truth. That is false advertising if you ask me, but that's another story for another day. To me FOX News is not adhering to a critical element of good journalism: objectivity. That does not mean complete neutrality, because it is nearly impossible to completely take out one's political views out of the equation. What it means is make a valid attempt to cover the other side, and don't let your bias override your reporting. FOX News is letting their political ideology take precedence over their actual news coverage if you ask me. Just look at how they treated those NYC antiwar protesters. Along with the fact you rarely see them interview democrats or not spinning a story about liberals to mock them or laugh at them. I'm not alone, my radio journalism professor last fall said similar things about them as well. I don't like the image they give to my future industry nor do I like the way they cover the news. And don't think I wouldn't call out CBS, ABC, NBC, if they allowed their "liberal" bias to override their reporting because I would. But while they are liberal, they make every attempt to be as close to objective as possible, something FOX News does not. I hope this explains my viewpoint a lot better.
