End of Freedom of Speech or a blow for Journalistic integrity?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

This is to stop people talking, writing, thinking.

 

So News Ltd and all of Australian mainstream media has "no integrity" because the Daily Tele reported one thing, and the Australian reported another. Amazing.

And so is the Australian. So you used the article from the Australian, to prove that mainstream Australian media has no integrity, despite the fact that they're owned by the same company as the Tele. You don't recognise a problem with your logic here?

You have NO IDEA of his motivations, or his accuracy, do not pretend that you do.

It's not really misleading to what he said, no.

In the middle of a civil war? No. I was in Syria two years ago though, how about you? Obviously I'm referring to official reports from UN observers.

Whatever actions are taken by who? Really, you support any actions taken against Assad despite your claims that he's just "defending himself"?

Er no, you took what I said, and reworded it to say something different.

So what if he was wrong? The journalist just reported what he said, and the article gave several other estimates on the death toll, including the UN saying the death toll and events were unclear.

"Defending his human rights recording" does not equal "good person". Hasn't violated human rights doesn't equal "innocent". I'm just using your logic here, it was you who started throwing around the accusations of "lying".

Anyway, I'm done with this now it's going absolutely no where.

 

Where is the “integrity” in working for a shady company? You have not yet told me.
“Daily Tele reported one thing, and the Australian reported another” Nicely said. Again I will put forward the question does the companys ethics differ in different countrys. We know what they were doing in the UK so who knows how low this company will go.

If you care to explain futher I might, I am eager to hear this.

Then what is his motive if hes a “anti assad” activist to state what he said. Nothing. Like I said if he had of lied he had the whole word to gain but that doesn't enter your mind. And UN has said the attack was aimed at Rebels, What we do know now is that other activists claiming “massacre” were incorrect.

Did you get that from the Telegraph article did you? No. So yes it is VERY misleading.

It is quite clear he is talking about Kofi peace plan NOT saying “Assad has a license to kill” but if he is serious about his statements in regard to abiding to the peace plan or else the fighting with continue.

I assume you know the FSA/Rebels told Russia that they do not want to “negotiate” with Assad. So you only need to think for a little which side has more to gain from on going conflict.

Maybe the Mainstream media could too before they report “200 civilians massacred” because a anti-government leader said so even though the Government claims otherwise,But obviously in your little own world reporting without facts is OK.

If he is found to massacred “200 civilians” like the integral media has reported,whatever comes his way he deserves. But we now know that statement was incorrect and founded on NOTHING but he said,she said. Integrity at its highest level right.

Again obviously reporting without facts is OK. You probably supported the harassment that Craig Thomson received. Sad.
And the UN has said the Army targeted Rebels.

Well you are lying. You said I said Assad has not abused human rights, Where have I said that you have not told me yet.
My logic, I don't really understand what you're saying. I never said Gaddafi was a good man nor have I “defended” his human rights records. Point out where I have then you may get some credibility but I suspect you wont because I never said such things.

If you're over it admit that the tele article was indeed misrepresentation of what happened and I did not say Assad hasn't violated human rights and I will admit I got the media wrong just so we can move on.