Like Jay Rosen, I am not particularly happy that Eason Jordan resigned over his Davos comments.
Jay is unhappy because he believes that “it is an outcome unjust on its face, based on what I know.”
I am unhappy for a similar but not identical reason, which Jay also expresses in his post:
Neither the public overlooking this sad event, nor the participants in it know why Eason Jordan quit. No reasons have been given, beyond saving CNN the trouble of a controversy.
In other words, we don’t know the truth.
Journalism — and the blogosphere — are supposed to be about the truth. And I don’t know what the truth is about Jordan’s comments. There are too many conflicting reports.
The fact that there apparently exists a tape that could settle this whole controversy — and the fact that we are unlikely to see it — should frustrate anyone interested in the truth.
I join the chorus of those who caution against gathering scalps in the absence of a revelation that justifies it. I don’t know if we have such a revelation yet. As Glenn Reynolds said on Friday (and I agreed), Jordan’s resignation certainly suggests that the tape would provide such a revelation. But, upon further reflection, I must admit that this is only an educated guess — one which may be wrong. We just don’t know. And we should.
So I’m not satisfied. And I won’t be until we know the truth.