Home » Lara Logan leaves the present-day journalism fold

Comments

Lara Logan leaves the present-day journalism fold — 20 Comments

  1. In light of recent events (just since New Year’s Day, in fact), this excerpt from the National Review article about Logan is almost worthy of the Babylon Bee:
    “The scandal surrounding the botched Benghazi report has echoes of Rathergate: a journalist with a political predisposition to believe a story presented by a dubious source; an apparent failure to do the most basic fact-checking; and, perhaps most important, a lack of oversight from CBS brass.”

  2. NR also highlights what might really be Logan’s sins in the view of the Left (although they weren’t bad enough then – Nov 2013 – to get her fired, they might be now):

    At the Better Government Association’s annual luncheon last year, she mocked the Obama administration for sending the FBI to investigate the Benghazi attack and urged it to “exact revenge and let the world know that the United States will not be attacked on its own soil. That its ambassadors will not be murdered, and that the United States will not stand by and do nothing about it.” In the wake of Michael Hastings’s bombshell Rolling Stone report that led to the dismissal of General Stanley McChrystal, she criticized Hastings for violating an “unspoken agreement” not to report on intra-military banter and concluded, “Michael Hastings has never served his country the way General McChrystal has.”

    In the same way that Rather’s report was considered a direct strike at George W. Bush, Logan’s exposé could be seen as a spurious attack on Hillary Clinton, the Democrats’ presumptive 2016 nominee, for her failure to heed repeated calls for enhanced security. But it has not sparked a similar outcry on the left, perhaps because many Democrats are uneasy about her candidacy. CBS News and vocal Democrats could well have collided head on.

  3. It is not so much what they do report; it’s what they don’t report. I can usually tell when they are lying or exaggerating, but I have to do a lot of digging to find out parts of the story that are missing and other stories that are far more important than how many burgers Trump served at the WH.

  4. Well,. at least she didn’t lie about a fake movie producer.

    In addition, the CBS News review said Logan’s assertions that al Qaeda carried out the attack and controlled the hospital were not adequately attributed in her report. The report also took issue with a speech Logan gave in October of 2012, one month before starting work on the Benghazi story.
    “Logan made a speech in which she took a strong public position arguing that the US Government was misrepresenting the threat from Al Qaeda, and urging actions that the US should take in response to the Benghazi attack,” the report says.

    I’d say she knows more about Islamic radicalism than the people who punished her,.

  5. “But that wouldn’t fix the larger problem, which is that they report from the skewed perspective of their personal politics.” – Neo

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/merciless-sympathy-phony-hate-crimes-mob-politics/

    “The plague of phony hate crimes on college campuses, often coinciding with controversial political events, isn’t the product of coincidence. It is a strategy. Fictitious, politically charged stories of rape — Lena Dunham’s encounter with “Barry” the College Republican, the lies published by Rolling Stone, etc.—are not the products of coincidence. These things happen in clusters for a reason. That is not to say they are being centrally directed as part of some kind of well-tempered conspiracy, but rather that they are the natural result of a certain kind of politics attached to a certain worldview.

    Merciless sympathy is used not only to silence doubters but to silence dissent. That is the purpose of conflating victims with political agendas. And if there aren’t any particularly useful victims around, you can always make something up.”

    http://thefederalist.com/2019/02/19/15-recent-hate-crime-hoaxes-might-make-suspect-theres-trend/

    “Outrage porn is not a victimless crime. Indeed, these hoaxes inspire very real violence as the mob feels compelled to take action against vilified Trump supporters. The hoaxes exacerbate tensions among Americans and sometimes destroy lives.

    But they also sell newspapers and garner clicks. A new outrage story seems to appear before the last one can be debunked. So long as Americans uncritically consume outrage porn, our collective reality warps. Stoking the rising outrage of the mob may be good for business, but it’s dangerous for our country.”

    https://www.wnky.com/man-accused-of-pulling-gun-on-couple-wearing-maga-hats/

    “BOWLING GREEN, Ky. – A Tennessee man is charged with first-degree wanton endangerment after witnesses told police he pulled a gun on a man who was wearing Make America Great Again hat inside Sam’s Club.
    … Phillips, who was wearing a veterans cap, told police he made the gesture at the man and a woman with him because of the MAGA hats they were wearing, according to his citation.”

  6. “But that wouldn’t fix the larger problem, which is that they report from the skewed perspective of their personal politics.”
    The media long ago turned into Pravda for the democrats. That was why I stopped taking the Washington post, the journalists were just democrat apparatchiks. There was no difference between the front pages and the editorial pages.

  7. Now we know that Logan was right, and Ortiz was fatally wrong. Also, the Mediterranean is still processing (“waterboarding”) the collateral damage from our poorly staffed social justice adventures in Libya and elsewhere.

  8. I’m a big fan of cleavage.

    Logan is feminine female. She was raped. She survived and prospers. She is fully clothed and sexy.

  9. Clevage does draw the straight male eye, i assume a woman with large clevage seeks to draw attention to her clevage. It distracts and attempts to make her words more attractive. Missus parker has peitite tatas, they have withstood the ravages of gravity and remained pert and beautiful, the pink nipples are a beautiful feature. My petite, no longer ginger sweety remains beautiful. The silver hair with a few streaks of red is also beautiful. Love the one you are with.

  10. That is not to say they are being centrally directed as part of some kind of well-tempered conspiracy

    People who still believe in the moon landing religion aren’t qualified to be talking about what they think is a well tempered or not conspiracy… they have no clue, as always.

  11. Tom Schaffner on February 19, 2019 at 3:24 pm at 3:24 pm said:
    Her clothing seems inappropriate for a professional interview. Just sayin’.

    I respect your opinion.

    On the other hand, one can both (i) appreciate the information and analysis delivered by the messenger, and (ii) enjoy the delivery as well.

    For me, Ms. Logan’s attire was well within the margins of propriety.

  12. (Lara Logan is on FOX News as I’m writing this comment.)

    In responding to Tom, Gerard made the following comments:

    Gerard vanderleun on February 19, 2019 at 3:31 pm at 3:31 pm said:
    She’s on a RADIO show Tom. A radio show.

    Gerard vanderleun on February 19, 2019 at 3:31 pm at 3:31 pm said:
    And besides, I’m a big fan of cleavage.

    In the Mike Drop interview, Lara Logan clearly knew she was being recorded on video. And for fans like Gerard and me, she purposely angled her body to face directly toward the camera, while her head was turned slightly left for her to see Mike.

  13. Lara, all I gotta say, to misquote the title of Bob Hope’s old theme song is, “thanks for the mammaries.”

    Logan had to know, when she shoehorned herself into that particular dress, that pushing those Ta Tas out there like that–to be so up front and visible–had to be a huge distraction for any guy, and she knew her statements were being filmed.

    I think that the appearance of Lara’s “girls” reduced the effectiveness of the points she was making, because how she was dressed made her seem less serious in making them.

    There were two messages, two focuses of interest here–her chest, and her critique of the media–when there should have been only one, her critique; her chest diverted attention from and lessened the impact of her critique.

    P.S. Some pictures of Logan on the Internet show her with what appears to be a much smaller chest, so I wonder if she has had some “work done.”

  14. The full 3 hours 40 minutes interview is riveting. The mention of the state of journalism is a footnote compared to the breadth of biographical information she shares.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>