Discussion on Current 'Affairs' in General Forum at TeluguPeople.com

The other / uglier face of journalism

Page: 1 of 2 Next > >

He Heeee :))

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 24, May 2005 10:25:55 AM IST

HMm Yuga Well Kiran, Are u talking abotu the ex Editor of Encounter Magazine who was killed brutallky in the broad day light after writing some articles against NTR? I just loved that guy .. maan .. he was one hell of a guy .. but unfortunatelu guys like him get killed and the real jerks survive!

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 1, May 2005 11:04:06 PM IST

Kuldip Nayyar, Seema Mustafa and Praful Bidwai are some of the SHAMLESS CREATURES ever born on earth who take pride in insulting their motherland for the sake of money and recognition. They are not even journalists .. they are just opinion makers

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 29, Apr 2005 3:05:49 PM IST

Focus on this :)) NAAS Guidelines to Detect Fraudulent Journalists _______________________________________ ¶ Using our vast experience in ethics, fairness, reliability, integrity, and respect for all American laws, customs, and ways, and our own published code of ethics, the guidelines below were developed using the NAAS system. The guidelines may apply to journalists, editors, and publishers who print stories in for-profit or commercial news periodicals. If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was "defamed" and was a "victim" but fails to cite independent sources to substantiate the claim then one may assume the journalist is corrupt and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was a "victim" but fails to quote sources that contradict such claims then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was a "victim" but fails to quote sources that contradict such claims then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story has a "web-site" and that the journalist attacks the free-speech content of the "website" but he/she fails to even mention the specific website address in the story being penned then it is a virtual certainty that the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, a liar, a seedy criminal, and simply unethical since the journalist is attempting to deprive readers of reaching an objective assessment while attacking the free-speech rights of others; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was a "victim" but fails to quote judicial sources or legal points of law as to the legal definition of such terms then one may assume the journalist is corrupt and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist simply parrots or repeats verbatim the same unproven or discredited claims of the sources of his story at the expense of the party or persons who discredited the statement(s) of the source(s) then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist simply implies or insinuates that the target of his story has committed any violations of law but fails to publicly substantiate such beliefs or fails to quote judicial sources or legal points of law, or professional legal counsel (not lay gossipers) experienced in such matters, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; ' If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist uses explict transitive or intransitive verbs or adjectives such as "pressured" or "ordered" but fails to recite details of an actual "order" as coming from a governmental agency, or evidence from an administrative Department, or demonstrative evidence from a federal or state judge that publicly documents the alleged "order" or "pressure" then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist uses explict transitive or intransitive verbs or adjectives such as "pressured" or "ordered" and independent investigations and inquiries to government agencies and magistrate files by disinterested third parties fails to produce the same alleged or implied evidence or documentation of the claimed "order" or "pressure" as coming from a governmental agency, an administrative Department, or a federal or state judge then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist encourages, solicits, entices, or invites any "law enforcement" agency to review a civil matter involving a target of his/her story, or engages in conduct that may be extrapolated or construed as an attempt to intimidate the exercise of free-speech or the freedom of association then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist encourages, solicits, induces, entices, or invites any person to violate any federal or state law or to violate any previously agreed upon covenant, contract, lease, agreement, or civil pact, absent a judicial order authorizing the reporter to do the same, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist haphazardly or flippantly pulls out the Race or Sexual-Orientation card in desperation to induce or steer the reading audience into a particular belief or frame of mind then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist makes no diligent effort to contact a target of his/her story, or fails to follow explicit procedures that the target of his story may have prepared to encourage such media interviews then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist omits favorable facts, pens an unbalanced story, or the story incites any disinterested reader to rage, acts of violence, or ridicule towards the target of the story then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist publishes speculative hearsay, unsubstantiated allegations, and outright false, or misleading statements, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist disparages by name a product or service or a person or a business without substantiation and fails to allow or print opposing statements in the same article, or fails to print positive experiences enjoyed by other persons regarding the target of his/her story then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist attempts to bait, incite, lure, trap, or fraudulently induce any law enforcement agency to investigate the target of his story, and the reporter cannot cite any evidence outside of speculation, conjecture, and hearsay to substantiate his/her personal beliefs, or the personal beliefs of others the reporter may have quoted then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately prints and publishes old, out-dated, and no longer relevant names, addresses, phone numbers, product names, and other information about the target of his/her story despite the free availability of on-line information directly from the source that substantially contradicts the information published by the journalist then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately quotes or uses the services of a disreputable group or person and fails to cite the fact that said person or group has been embroiled in previous lawsuits, civil actions, has a criminal record, and/or has been subject to state/federal investigations regarding its services or products then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately quotes or uses the services of a disreputable group or organization and fails to cite the fact that the officers, directors, or President of such group or organization has been the defandant in previous lawsuits, civil actions, and/or state/federal investigations then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist publishes a story about a specific industry and fails to include a profile of what qualifies him/her to discuss said industry then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist quotes the actual name of any source(s) and fails to disclose the manner, method, and means as to how the journalist came upon said source(s) then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately mis-quotes his/her source, or fabricates such quotes, or embellishes such quotes in such a way to produce a desired affect or tone to the article, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist accepts cash, gifts, money, or anything of an emotional, artistic, monetary, or sentimmental value and fails to diclose the same in bold print preceding the first paragraph of the article then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist does not adhere to each and every proposed canon and Code of Ethics as approved by the Society of Professional Journalists then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist pals around with New York Under-Boss figures, or Mafia-based crime families, and ALSO pens articles against persons that discuss the habits, or conduct of such figures, WHILE the same reporter or his employer secretly accepts cash, gifts, or favors from the chief beneficiaries of his/her articles, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist advocates, endorses, or approves of practices that smack of anti-miscegenation or the prohibition of inmtermarraige between two heterosexuals of a different religious and/or racial background or other established cornerstones of the American democratic society then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical.

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 29, Apr 2005 12:08:51 PM IST

http://www.naas.org/axx34.htm#Page_1 This brief Media Report contains a subject matter of general and public interest, and should be read only by persons interested in the subject and contents therein. This report is a public service announcement. If you feel you have been the victim of Journalistic Fraud, or you know of a person, friend, or relative, or mother, daughter, or son, that has been the victim of Journalistic Fraud, or you would simply like to share with others valuable NAAS stories, then we encourage you or your company to quote and provide direct hyper-links to this web page. As a reminder, National Academy of American Scholars has a long history of high and demanding standards, corporate ethics, and the belief that integrity counts!! We have received many letters of support for our stories, and our high ethics and integrity, as evidenced by our public NAAS EAS/N2 Rules. Introduction and Summary Background of Report ¶ Corrupt journalists. It seems as though they are everywhere. The Los Angeles Times. Salon. The New York Times. New York Magazine. The Chicago Tribune. U.S.A. Today. All of these news sources, and many more have reported on stories of corrupt journalists. In this report, we discuss the tactics, procedures, and practices of corrupt journalists, as well as hypothetical examples of various schemes used by the dishoest journalist, and how readers can analyze news stories for accuracy and integrity. We rely upon information and guidelines from the Society of Professional Journalists and their published Code of Ethics, as well as federal, and state laws, and NAAS EAS/N2 Rules. This report parrallels a related story on the subject of Yellow Journalism. The Dishonest Journalist ¶ While reading the case of Mr. Jayson Blair of the New York Times, and many other journalists whose conduct has come under the ethical microscope, my mind began to wonder. Was the case of Mr. Blair an aberration or are corrupt journalists pretty much routine? Why is it that New York, or the East Coast, appear to have a greater percentage of dishonest, unethical, and corrupt journalists than elsewhere? When a story originates from a New York source, the unspoken reaction for many West coast residents and World leaders is to immediately suspect a hidden motive. The fact of the matter is that crimes and deeds of dishonesty committed by journalists are just as frequent as crimes committed in any other place of work. That is a cold, concrete, and indisputable fact. Dishonest journalists are not interested in ANY fact or detail that disagrees with their pre-conceived notions. To impress upon readers with his/her credibility, the egotistical, arrogant, and morally corrupt reporter will often recite irrelevant details of his title with a respected university, or name-drop which newspapers he is a free-lance writer for, or reference meaningless "book awards" supposedly won by the reporter as if such "awards" have a bearing on the accuracy and interity of the story at hand. ¶ The dishonest journalist, a/k/a/ Yellow Journalist oftentimes relies upon an assortment of mules, pigeons, political moles, and parrots as "legitimate sources" without ever disclosing the shady past of such persons or what the persons are acccused of by others. The Yellow Journalist will simply ignore a flottila of facts and judicial decisions, and omit other facts, simply to rush the publication of something packaged as a "news-story". Perhaps the term lie is a better word. A rush to cheat. A rush to mislead and a rush to deceive. Such characters and their methods will ignore not only facts but will ignore other facts, and more facts. Disproven assertions, adverse insinuations, and character assaults, and the printing of outright lies or made up fabrications are the prime characteristics of a dishonest journalist. When and/or if published in such media sources as the U.S.A. Today, or New York Times, or the New York Magazine, or Salon, or any news publications that dishonest and corrupt journalist may have a professional association with, including associations with seemingly respectable universities, the "news-story" by the hoodlum reporter takes on an aura of believability to the gullible, naive, ill-prepared, and ill-informed. ¶ Yellow Journalists, and the cast of characters that are derivatives of these groups, simply cannot be trusted to the extent they claim. They rely upon a shank of deceit, false statements, and unsubstantiated innuendo that is designed to suit the flavor of the article or story they already INTEND to write. Mainstream Journalists Takes a Hit ¶ Have we not witnessed enough unethical and arrogant conduct amongst mainstream journalists, self-dealing authors, AND crooked political pundits? Barely a day goes by when we have not been informed of improper payments to journalists designed to fashion a news story. What about profit-minded and publicity-driven university professors who spend a significant amount of their time writing controversial, and worthless self-promotional books, or penning meaningless columns for mainstream media instead of being in the classroom where they are supposed to be? Were the professors hired to teach a specific body of students at a specific institution, or were these persons hired to promote themselves to the outside world? ¶ No legitimate and self-respecting author needs a fancy university title to sell his book. Fools and more fools. Certainly you have heard of some of them. Some hypothetical examples are the Freedmans, the Changs, the Cohens, the Kummers, the Centors, the Rosens, the Goldsteins, the Armstrong Williams, the Jayson Blairs, the Coolidges, the Whitfields, the Greenes, and many others. Has mainstream journalism become junk journalism? Remember the Richard Jewel case? Corrupt reporters rushed to judgment on Mr. Jewell and virtually pronounced him guilty before he was tried and convicted of the Atlanta bombings. Eventually, the first-class attorneys of Mr. Jewell brought civil actions against the New York Post, CNN, NBC, and a host of other seemingly respected media outlets. ¶ What about the role in mainstream media in the infamous Charles Stuart case several decades ago? Journalists at first sided with the businessman Mr. Stuart who had first claimed that a "black" person entered into his home at night and killed his wife. In reality, the fair-hued Mr. Stuart was the real murderer. Representatives of Mr. Stuart's community felt ashamed, and members of other communities felt like they were defamed and libeled by seemingly respectable news outlets before the truth of Mr. Stuart's outrageous scheme unfolded. ¶ In one of the most savage entries in New York's crime annals - the 1989 Central Park wilding attack on a female jogger with ties to Wall Street - was unwound after DNA evidence surfaced that the wrongly accused and wrongly convicted youths were in fact innocent. Corrupt and dishonest journalists never attempted to investigate ANY facts that may have benefitted the youths. Instead, Yellow Journalists targeted the youths and freely and quickly accepted pigeon statements provided by corrupt law enforcement representatives. Know How to Spot Journalism Fraud ¶ Imagine a journalist that writes for such publications as U.S.A. Today, the New York Times, and other prestigious employers. Also, imagine a journalist that is also the author of several books, and has been recognized for his alleged "efforts" by The Chicago Tribune, The Washington Post, the Indianapolis Star, The New York Times Book Review, the Los Angeles Times, or other notable publications. Imagine that the same journalist is a member of the prestigius Society of Professional Journalists. Last, but not least, even imagine that the same journalist is also a tenured professor of "Journalism" at a respectable university on the East coast, in New York. In short, imagine a Robert Phillip Hanssen type person of journalism; a liar with a fancy title, a liar with a fancy employer, a liar with a fancy salary, a liar with fancy friends, a liar with fancy book accolades, a liar with a fancy, but dumb wife, a liar with fancy kids, a liar with a fancy Manhattan address, and a liar with a fancy arrangement to serve as a free-lance reporter for multiple newspapers while also serving as a tenured university professor at a name brand school on the East coast. Such fancy arrangements are the PERFECT, REPEAT PERFECT, cover for Journalistic fraud, and other crimes. Who is to question the seasoned experience or integrity of a university professor, or a Mr. Hanssen, who has was a federal agent for 30 years? ¶ When someone finally had the nerve to question the integrity, habits, and unusual practices of Mr. Hanssen, and when the light was finally exposed on his Socialist idealism, the damage was already done. U.S. government attorneys then branded Mr. Hanssen a liar, thief, and traitor. ¶ This reports sheds the light on corrupt journalists and unethical practices and informs readers and consumers to not be blinded by fancy or material titles or fancy connections that a corrupt reporter advertises. This report seeks to shed light on the methods, means, and ways, of a corrupt journalist and help enlighten the public about possible methods of uncovering journalistic fraud by reporters employed at mainstream newspapers and seemingly respectablle universities. ¶ As evidenced by his employment in a federal agency, the entire U.S. government had at one time endorsed Mr. Hanssen until the true character of this man was revealed. No reporter or professor of journalism is above the U.S. Constitution. If found liable, any party harmed by such person(s) should seek legal counsel and do precisely what Mr. Richard Jewell, and many others have done, when victimized by Journalistic fraud. Let the corrupt journalist dig a hole for himself/herself and then seek legal retribution. Never, never, lower yourself to a hoodlum, criminal, or use methods and means that are associated with parrots, pigeons, mules, corrupt reporters, and sympathizers of such practices. Stay above the law, and use the force of the U.S. Constitution. Let the reporter get a little comfortable, and then smash him/her with a civil suit that FORCES the unethical journalist to substantiate EACH AND EVERY innuendo, EACH AND EVERY insinuation, and EACH AND EVERY fabrication, and the credibility of EACH AND EVERY source quoted. NAAS Guidelines to Detect Fraudulent Journalists ¶ Using our vast experience in ethics, fairness, reliability, integrity, and respect for all American laws, customs, and ways, and our own published code of ethics, the guidelines below were developed using the NAAS system. The guidelines may apply to journalists, editors, and publishers who print stories in for-profit or commercial news periodicals. If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was "defamed" and was a "victim" but fails to cite independent sources to substantiate the claim then one may assume the journalist is corrupt and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was a "victim" but fails to quote sources that contradict such claims then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was a "victim" but fails to quote sources that contradict such claims then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story has a "web-site" and that the journalist attacks the free-speech content of the "website" but he/she fails to even mention the specific website address in the story being penned then it is a virtual certainty that the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, a liar, a seedy criminal, and simply unethical since the journalist is attempting to deprive readers of reaching an objective assessment while attacking the free-speech rights of others; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist claims one of the subjects of his story was a "victim" but fails to quote judicial sources or legal points of law as to the legal definition of such terms then one may assume the journalist is corrupt and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist simply parrots or repeats verbatim the same unproven or discredited claims of the sources of his story at the expense of the party or persons who discredited the statement(s) of the source(s) then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist simply implies or insinuates that the target of his story has committed any violations of law but fails to publicly substantiate such beliefs or fails to quote judicial sources or legal points of law, or professional legal counsel (not lay gossipers) experienced in such matters, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; ' If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist uses explict transitive or intransitive verbs or adjectives such as "pressured" or "ordered" but fails to recite details of an actual "order" as coming from a governmental agency, or evidence from an administrative Department, or demonstrative evidence from a federal or state judge that publicly documents the alleged "order" or "pressure" then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist uses explict transitive or intransitive verbs or adjectives such as "pressured" or "ordered" and independent investigations and inquiries to government agencies and magistrate files by disinterested third parties fails to produce the same alleged or implied evidence or documentation of the claimed "order" or "pressure" as coming from a governmental agency, an administrative Department, or a federal or state judge then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist encourages, solicits, entices, or invites any "law enforcement" agency to review a civil matter involving a target of his/her story, or engages in conduct that may be extrapolated or construed as an attempt to intimidate the exercise of free-speech or the freedom of association then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist encourages, solicits, induces, entices, or invites any person to violate any federal or state law or to violate any previously agreed upon covenant, contract, lease, agreement, or civil pact, absent a judicial order authorizing the reporter to do the same, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist haphazardly or flippantly pulls out the Race or Sexual-Orientation card in desperation to induce or steer the reading audience into a particular belief or frame of mind then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist makes no diligent effort to contact a target of his/her story, or fails to follow explicit procedures that the target of his story may have prepared to encourage such media interviews then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist omits favorable facts, pens an unbalanced story, or the story incites any disinterested reader to rage, acts of violence, or ridicule towards the target of the story then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist publishes speculative hearsay, unsubstantiated allegations, and outright false, or misleading statements, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist disparages by name a product or service or a person or a business without substantiation and fails to allow or print opposing statements in the same article, or fails to print positive experiences enjoyed by other persons regarding the target of his/her story then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist attempts to bait, incite, lure, trap, or fraudulently induce any law enforcement agency to investigate the target of his story, and the reporter cannot cite any evidence outside of speculation, conjecture, and hearsay to substantiate his/her personal beliefs, or the personal beliefs of others the reporter may have quoted then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately prints and publishes old, out-dated, and no longer relevant names, addresses, phone numbers, product names, and other information about the target of his/her story despite the free availability of on-line information directly from the source that substantially contradicts the information published by the journalist then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately quotes or uses the services of a disreputable group or person and fails to cite the fact that said person or group has been embroiled in previous lawsuits, civil actions, has a criminal record, and/or has been subject to state/federal investigations regarding its services or products then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately quotes or uses the services of a disreputable group or organization and fails to cite the fact that the officers, directors, or President of such group or organization has been the defandant in previous lawsuits, civil actions, and/or state/federal investigations then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist publishes a story about a specific industry and fails to include a profile of what qualifies him/her to discuss said industry then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist quotes the actual name of any source(s) and fails to disclose the manner, method, and means as to how the journalist came upon said source(s) then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If, while reading a newspaper or on-line column, a journalist deliberately mis-quotes his/her source, or fabricates such quotes, or embellishes such quotes in such a way to produce a desired affect or tone to the article, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist accepts cash, gifts, money, or anything of an emotional, artistic, monetary, or sentimmental value and fails to diclose the same in bold print preceding the first paragraph of the article then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist does not adhere to each and every proposed canon and Code of Ethics as approved by the Society of Professional Journalists then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist pals around with New York Under-Boss figures, or Mafia-based crime families, and ALSO pens articles against persons that discuss the habits, or conduct of such figures, WHILE the same reporter or his employer secretly accepts cash, gifts, or favors from the chief beneficiaries of his/her articles, then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical; If a journalist advocates, endorses, or approves of practices that smack of anti-miscegenation or the prohibition of inmtermarraige between two heterosexuals of a different religious and/or racial background or other established cornerstones of the American democratic society then one may assume the journalist is corrupt, dishonest, and simply unethical. Conclusion ¶ In conclusion, the above represents a few guidelines that consumers may use to detect dishonest, corrupt, or unethical reporters. Like many other professions, the journalism profession certainly has its share of haredi characters. Their conduct is illegal, unethical, and their intent is to deprive the public of honest services. Like corrupt attorneys, the dishonest journalist uses his/her title and employment as a weapon against those they feel will not and cannot testify to their crimes or counter their unethical reporting. ¶ Many corrupt reporters leave tell-tale signs of their true character, their suspicious associations, and their propensity to lie, cheat, or steal. One of the great ways to research the character or backgound of any reporter or journalist figure to examine the number of libel and/or defamtion suits that have been filed against the reporter or the empoyer of the reporter. Another means is to simply research and review any books or other periodicals that the subject reporter may have authored. Oftentimes, a book reveals the true colors of a reporter and is a personal signature of the reporter's unethical conduct, sleazy thoughts, and propensity to be a liar or cheat; if you follow this route in researching the background of a reporter then do not be impressed by the fraudulent-like statements that appear in the inserts supposedly praising the book. Many of the phrases of support are undeserved, and simply are arranged shills from fellow colleagues who do the same for each other regardless of the true quality, or lack thereof, of the book in question. ¶ In fact, a hard-cover book or records of a defamation lawsuit are two of just many methods that provides direct evidence of how a corrupt reporter may actually feel and how he engages in his routines to fool the public. A book, for example, reveals the sort of people that a corrupt reporter is associated with. A book may be a veritable signature of a crook. For example, if a reporter uses the Race card in an attempt to discredit his/her target or gain sympathy from representatives of his/her race but the reporter himself has written books that specifically disdains "intermarraige", a fancy term used by some separatists that really means the reporter is against "race-mixing [the blunt term used by the Ku Klux Klan], then can you really believe in the integrity of the reporter? If the reporter also uses explicit hateful expressions and claims in his book that "rampant intermarraige" will cause his/her own racial group to "cease to exist" then it does not take a PhD from Stanford University, or an investigation by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, to know what type of person the reporter or author really is. Every Tom Metzgar or Joseph Goebbels does not wear a sign or hood, but there are warning signs of such persons. ¶ Certainly, if you do seek to research the backgound of a reporter do not spend your hard-earned money by buying their books. We do not advocate financing hate figures. Nor do we endorse authors of hate speech or apologists for Socialism. Simply go to a local book-store, or library, and review (for free, of course) the writings of the suspect reporter. If you do decide to purchase the book of any criminal journalist, and want to return it, please know that almost all national book store chains allow for a full refund or an exchange. As a last guide, a substantial number of the worst journalist fraud cases seem to appear on the East Coast, home of at least five Mafia-based crime families. If a journalist, claims for example, to be a tenured professor at a New-York based university, and has two or more characteristics mentioned in this article, then you should research his/her record a little more. ¶ If you encounter any print story appearing in any mainstream or for-profit publication that has any of these warning signs, it is quite likely, but not guaranteed, that the journalist in question is dishonest, corrupt, and unethical. Write a letter to the Editor of the paper or publication demanding that the corrupt journalist be fired; or, simply cancel your subcription since a good many other stories appearing in the same publication are probably bogus also. ¶ No reporter or even a professor of journalism is above the U.S. Constitution. Do not be impressed with fancy titiles. The greatest spys and most corrupt traitors in history of the United States were able to ply their trade because of "fancy" titles. If found liable, any party harmed by such person(s) should seek legal counsel and do precisely what Mr. Richard Jewell, any many other persons regularly do to protect their reputations, their legitimate business practices, and their clients. File suit. Publish your experiences. Alert the civilized members of society that a corrupt or NAZI journalist is preying upon citizens. Etc. If any journalist cannot or refuses to substantiate his innuendo, insinuations, and fabrications then it is perfectly within reason to label him/her a liar, and a cheat. ¶ Well, that's my opinion. What's yours?

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 29, Apr 2005 12:03:14 PM IST

You r spot on .. daanni secularism ani kaakunda Specularism ante baagundedemo :))

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 27, Apr 2005 7:15:34 PM IST

Needed ur endorsement saar. Just to confirm whether I've understood u correctly or not.

Posted by: Bahud♥♥rapu Baatasaari At: 27, Apr 2005 6:34:46 PM IST

Cheppedantha cheppesi pakkana question mark enduku saaru? :))

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 27, Apr 2005 3:55:28 PM IST

anTE mI uddESam EnTi sArU, sekyularijam anEdi chUsE kaLLani baTTi unTundA? anTE A chUsE nA yadavalu vakra dRushTi kalavAranA? aha, nAku telIkaDigAlEnDi.

Posted by: Bahud♥♥rapu Baatasaari At: 27, Apr 2005 3:33:16 PM IST

Jyoti Basu Crosses a stream in Bengal by foot.. Statesman: Basu crosses a River by foot The Hindu: Basu saves the state a Boat Times of India: Basu Can't swim Praja Shakti: Basu proves his secular credentials by crossing a river by foot

Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 27, Apr 2005 2:44:52 PM IST

Page: 1 of 2 Next > >