Question: which Eason Jordan controversy was more damaging to CNN’s reputation? The most recent one, in which Jordan allegedly accused the military of targeting journalists? Or the earlier one, in which Jordan admitted keeping his network silent about Saddam’s atrocities, in order to maintain a CNN bureau in Baghdad?
From the standpoint of those who are concerned about truth in media, I think the answer is easy: the earlier one.
Jordan’s most recent accusations — if he really made them and didn’t instantly back down — show him to be an unstable person willing to entertain ridiculous conspiracy theories about our government and military. If he really made these accusations, and didn’t back down, then his stewardship of CNN might have influenced the network to portray the news in a more anti-American light.
There’s a lot of supposition hidden in that last sentence.
But with the earlier scandal, we know for a fact that the network distorted the truth that it reported to its viewers. It couldn’t be clearer. Jordan admitted as much in an op-ed in the New York Times.
So why is this latest scandal worse? Why is it the one that caused his resignation?? What am I missing here???