ShortFormBlognyu Archives

Mr. Rosen tells me that he misunderstood the severity of the attack on her in Cairo. He has apologized, withdrawn his remarks, and submitted his resignation as a fellow, which I have accepted. However, this in no way compensates for the harm his comments have inflicted.
NYU Center on Law and Security Executive Director Karen J. Greenberg • In accepting Nir Rosen’s resignation over his comments on Twitter criticizing Lara Logan in the wake of reports of her sexual assault in Egypt. “I am deeply distressed by what he wrote about Ms. Logan and strongly denounce his comments,” Greenberg wrote in a statement. “They were cruel and insensitive and completely unacceptable.” Rosen, a journalist who has been featured in a number of publications in the past and is noted for his Iraq War coverage, profusely apologized for what he said on Twitter: “There is no point following me, i am done tweeting. Too ashamed of how i have hurt others and the false impression i gave of who i am.” source

Posted by Ernie Smith • 0 Comments • Permalink

Short answer: It gains little traction otherwise. NYU superhuman being Jay Rosen pointed this fact out on Twitter tonight. Last year, Wikileaks guy Julian Assange put it like this: “You’d think the bigger and more important the document is, the more likely it will be reported on but that’s absolutely not true. It’s about supply and demand. Zero supply equals high demand, it has value. As soon as we release the material, the supply goes to infinity, so the perceived value goes to zero.” So in other words, if they just put it up without talking to the press first, nobody would see it. source

Posted by Ernie Smith • 3 Comments • Permalink

In a word, the Times editors and Barstow know this narrative is nuts, but something stops them from saying so — despite the fact that they must have spent over $100,000 on this one story.
Our boy Jay Rosen • Regarding a recent New York Times article about the Tea Party movement which seemed to accept a seemingly wrong-on-its-face statement about our country – “a narrative of impending tyranny” – as fact. This phrase floored Rosen enough that he wrote a huge blog post about it. The point that he’s getting at, and that we completely agree with, is that the need for objectivity doesn’t mean you can’t consider or critique what’s being said. Being impartial is one thing; being oblivious, or repeating what’s being said without qualification is another altogether. We owe readers more than that. source

Posted by Ernie Smith • 0 Comments • Permalink

16 Feb 2011 11:12