www.ditl.org

sunnyside wrote:
Whichever. My point is they weren't either. They were her "out in the open" panel. I don't know how they're selected. Atheists blowing out internal organs in rage blocks most other information on her show, but I did get the transcript for the show.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ ... zn.01.html

You mind explaining the bold.

First off I notice the atheist thing doesn't even make the list of main stories. Getting beaten out by examining why its been 98 years since America elected a fat president.

The main theme of the episode was racism and if there was anything the panelists were brought in for it was that. Being as the panel consisted of two black people and the author of "Why Black Men Love White Women"

There just happened to be the Atheist story in that episode. I guess if you want to bitch about something in the episode it could be that the Atheist story was sort of just along for the ride instead of being the main story.

Or you know, that Americans treat Athiests like fourth class citizens. Behind blacks, hispanics and muslims.

Oh, and on the panelists I found this transcript hilarious in that Zahn doesn't know the people who were invited to the panel and introduces two of them as the other.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ ... zn.01.html

That's about par for the course.

Cpl Kendall wrote: You mind explaining the bold.

I engage in hyperbole but a serious shitstorm was launched in regards to this. Judging by google/wiki results it was a defining moment of the "out in the open" show under Paula Zahn and for some of the panelists involved. Wasn't just an after the fact thing either, apperantely they took so much crap they brought on Richard Dawkins to play a little slow pitch softball.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTZONIl5 ... re=related
and then they did the panel thing thing again with Ellen Johnson.

I don't know if I want to call appeasement on that, but their attempt to reach out by making an episode more focused on the atheist thing along with some major atheist leaders didn't seem to matter in your opinion of them.

The irony of the situation is that Zahn or one of the editors was really on the Atheists side in the first episdoe. The story was clearly sympathetic to the atheists. They actually ran the story and brought up the issue while other shows generally aren't so friendly. And then they get burned at the stake because they didn't make it the primary focus of the episode and brought on panelists to talk about the main topic of the episode, racism.

Or you know, that Americans treat Athiests like fourth class citizens. Behind blacks, hispanics and muslims.

Which, again, was reported in the story they ran in the episode you're busting Zahns ovaries about and using as a basis for right wing bias on CNNs part.

I mean really. Do you think that story was anything but sympathetic to the atheists and attempting to bolster their civil rights? Do you think a network running that makes them MORE right wing?

sunnyside wrote: I engage in hyperbole but a serious shitstorm was launched in regards to this. Judging by google/wiki results it was a defining moment of the "out in the open" show under Paula Zahn and for some of the panelists involved. Wasn't just an after the fact thing either, apperantely they took so much crap they brought on Richard Dawkins to play a little slow pitch softball.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTZONIl5 ... re=related
and then they did the panel thing thing again with Ellen Johnson.

I don't know if I want to call appeasement on that, but their attempt to reach out by making an episode more focused on the atheist thing along with some major atheist leaders didn't seem to matter in your opinion of them.

Maybe it would, if I actually knew about it.

The irony of the situation is that Zahn or one of the editors was really on the Atheists side in the first episdoe. The story was clearly sympathetic to the atheists. They actually ran the story and brought up the issue while other shows generally aren't so friendly. And then they get burned at the stake because they didn't make it the primary focus of the episode and brought on panelists to talk about the main topic of the episode, racism.

I don't give two craps what the orginal topic of the episode was, just what actually transpired in regards to the discussion on athiesm.

Which, again, was reported in the story they ran in the episode you're busting Zahns ovaries about and using as a basis for right wing bias on CNNs part.

I mean really. Do you think that story was anything but sympathetic to the atheists and attempting to bolster their civil rights? Do you think a network running that makes them MORE right wing?

Don't assume that I am refering to CNN's little panel here. It's a well known fact in the rest of the world that America does not hold Athiests in high regard.

Cpl Kendall wrote:Don't assume that I am refering to CNN's little panel here. It's a well known fact in the rest of the world that America does not hold Athiests in high regard.

Yes you were referring to the panel! That's exactly what you were doing! You were leveling accusations of right wing bias at CNN in large part based than panel (while totally overlooking the sympathetic story they ran just before).

Maybe it would, if I actually knew about it.

Well, now you do know. And I think even you'd admit that the panelests were brought on for their opinions on race relations as opposed to being brought on for the atheist discussion. Nor were they being flaunted as experts on the matter or anything. I mean the one guy is just a sports commentator (again brought on because one of the bits was on racism in the NFL).

So what are your current thoughts on CNN in regards to bias? In regards to this episode (and the follow up episode), and in general.

Uh, Sunny, are you seriously suggesting that CNN isn't slanted to the right?

Atheists can all go to hell!

Get it? It's a joke... they can't really, 'cause they don't have a hell, 'cause it's a religious concept...

Never mind.

Yeah, this is really a symptom of CNN's leaning, rather than an individual syndrome of itself.

The only news I watch are The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.

Sunnyside, my current thoughts on CNN are that they are a steaming turd. Like the rest of the mainstream US media. Not as bad as Fox News but bad, especially when compared to the Beeb or CBC.

Cpl Kendall wrote:Sunnyside, my current thoughts on CNN are that they are a steaming turd. Like the rest of the mainstream US media. Not as bad as Fox News but bad, especially when compared to the Beeb or CBC.

Or even CBBC, but you'll have to look that up to get the joke

IanKennedy wrote: Or even CBBC, but you'll have to look that up to get the joke

*snicker* Good one Ian.

IanKennedy wrote:

Cpl Kendall wrote:Sunnyside, my current thoughts on CNN are that they are a steaming turd. Like the rest of the mainstream US media. Not as bad as Fox News but bad, especially when compared to the Beeb or CBC.

Or even CBBC, but you'll have to look that up to get the joke

Why is that a joke? It's obviously aimed at the same level of mentality as Fox News...

Mikey wrote:
Why is that a joke? It's obviously aimed at the same level of mentality as Fox News...

Fox News might actually be taken more seriously if they did it as a cartoon.

They'd certainly capture more of the American general populace.

Cpl Kendall wrote:Sunnyside, my current thoughts on CNN are that they are a steaming turd. Like the rest of the mainstream US media. Not as bad as Fox News but bad, especially when compared to the Beeb or CBC.

Yes yes. Canada shits sunshine and roses while America sucks at everything. There really isn't any point to arguing this with you in general terms because I'm not going to be able to integrate something and say X="cnn is unbiased"

However I think I made my case that the whole "atheist panel" business isn't grounds for waving the bias stick at them.

Actually do you even watch CNN or any American news outlet? I'm guessing you've heard about Fox news because it shows up in jokes all the time. But are you basing your general position on anything more than your strong belief that Canada is wonderful, Britain is OK, and America is horrible?

Now to be honest I don't watch TV anymore myself. My news is therefore almost entirely from the web (specifically CNN and BBC usually). And it sounds like most accusations of bias are from stuff somebody says on some show that isn't straight up news (I.e. something like hardball).

sunnyside wrote:

Cpl Kendall wrote:Sunnyside, my current thoughts on CNN are that they are a steaming turd. Like the rest of the mainstream US media. Not as bad as Fox News but bad, especially when compared to the Beeb or CBC.

Yes yes. Canada shits sunshine and roses while America sucks at everything. There really isn't any point to arguing this with you in general terms because I'm not going to be able to integrate something and say X="cnn is unbiased"

However I think I made my case that the whole "atheist panel" business isn't grounds for waving the bias stick at them.

Actually do you even watch CNN or any American news outlet? I'm guessing you've heard about Fox news because it shows up in jokes all the time. But are you basing your general position on anything more than your strong belief that Canada is wonderful, Britain is OK, and America is horrible?

Now to be honest I don't watch TV anymore myself. My news is therefore almost entirely from the web (specifically CNN and BBC usually). And it sounds like most accusations of bias are from stuff somebody says on some show that isn't straight up news (I.e. something like hardball).

We do actually get CNN and Fox over here. I have seen it and it's not good. Fox is like watching the Nazi party news. CNN isn't that bad, but it has the attention span of a small dog.