February 11, 2005
The Washington Times weighs in with a powerful Op-Ed titled Stonewalling at CNN. The writers of this editorial have done their homework, and ask if "the debate now raging in the blogosphere merely a tempest in a teapot". The answer is no (for the same reasons I explained in my first post on Eason Jordan). While Mr. Jordan certainly has the right to exercise free speech, he was acting as an agent of CNN at the conference in Davos:
First, Mr. Jordan is a person of some importance. Not only is he CNN's chief news executive, but also, according to CNN's Web site, he chairs the editorial board, is a member of the executive committee and "provides strategic advice" to the senior management team. Clearly, Mr. Jordan has considerable say in what goes on at CNN headquarters in Atlanta. Of course, as big as he is, Mr. Jordan is entitled to his own opinions. However, what Mr. Jordan said at Davos wasn't a matter of personal beliefs; as a representative of CNN, the world's largest news network, he accused American troops of targeting journalists.
As disgusting as Mr. Jordan's comments about American troops are, many have died and will continue to die protecting his right to voice his opinion. He can say whatever he wants, but it is wholly inappropriate and unprofessional for CNN's chief news executive to accuse American troops of targeting journalists without a single shred of evidence to back up these outrageous claims.
Freedom of speech works both ways. Eason Jordan certainly can say whatever pleases him. We have a right to exercise our free speech and demand that CNN take action in this matter.
Release the tape and terminate Mr. Jordan if the numerous accounts of his statements are true.