Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist. Many, including The Last Amazon, will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories:

Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline."

Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations.

"My goal is to protect our reporters and protect our editorial integrity," he said.

Reuters has long claimed, delusionally, that by dropping the word "terrorist," they are somehow adding to the "objectivity" of their reporting. I say that by dropping the word they are whitewashing what major actors around the world are doing. Look, a terrorist is someone who 1) does not distinguish between a combatant and a civilian and usually prefers a softer civilian victim. A terrorist 2) claims that the ends justify the means. Terrorism has nothing whatsoever to do with economics. That is a smear we hear from terrorists and their apologizers, one that is designed to confuse and paralyze any response. It is rooted in Marxist writing and thought and by now we ought to know what a pile that stuff has been. When you hear a terrorist ask about "who the real terrorists are" he is babbling pseudo Marxist garbage and should be called on it by any reporter worth the name. Reuters claims that by whitewashing their reports, they are protecting reporters. I say, groups that harass reporters should be cut off. Don't air their videos either. Eventually they will beg for some means to get their word out, probably by a temporary ceasefire - and that's better than no ceasefire. I don't see blogs changing this. Bodies like the CRTC have to help by keeping things like Al Jezeera out of Canada. It is an act that would help to justify the existence of a governmental body like that. CNN was even more blunt last year. They said they had to be in Iraq, even if it meant spoon feeding Ba'athist garbage to the world, because if they were not, then others would be and CNN would be getting scooped. This is short term thinking. When those news sources are revealed to have caved in to totalitarian lies they will be discredited. How can it be "objective" to cover for people who would remove your freedom to report the news in a way that you feel is "objective?" How can it be "objective" to watch terrorists place a bomb in the road and not warn people that it is there? How can that not be collaboration? If you agree with these sentiments, you can help by canceling any subscription you have when that publication whitewashes terror. And don't forget to tell them why you're doing it. That would get the attention of people like David A. Schlesinger real fast.