|
November 22, 2005
Too incompetent for malice right now . . .
This X business fascinates me, and while I'm inclined to go with Evan Coyne Maloney -- "CNN should get the benefit of the doubt. There's an old saying: Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence" -- I find myself wondering if there would have been a similar reaction on the left had Fox News committed a similar blunder by flashing a big black X over Hillary Clinton's forehead. Watching the video (which Ian Schwartz has available for streaming), it's certainly understandable why conservatives would react, especially because the hated Dick Cheney is always a favorite, well, target for lack of a better word. I'd also give CNN the benefit of the "never ascribe malice" maxim, but this brings to mind another maxim called "trust but verify." There's also such a thing as malicious incompetence, but if I get started I'll be more late for a dentist than I already am, and we can't have my dentist thinking I'm incompetent or malicious, can we? (That might not be, um, safe!)
A well-placed CNN insider claims a control room staffer "laughed" when the image appeared shortly after 11 am.Are control room staffers supposed to laugh at their work product? MORE: I kind of like enjoy the CNN explanation in there from the control guy who said it was like your computer will glitch: And it's the sort of thing that just like your computer will glitch and will suddenly lock up and do something weird, our equipment does the same thing on occasions.I'm going on occasion soon myself. posted by Eric on 11.22.05 at 07:19 AM
Comments
Actually, Richard Feynman said, "Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity". Brooks · November 23, 2005 12:31 PM Thanks for the clarification. Stupidity is not necessarily incompetence -- although both are more likely causes than malice. Eric Scheie · November 23, 2005 01:05 PM Given the record of CNN, I believe it was intentional. As a great Senator once said about the record of the State Department: "If it was merely a matter of blunders or stupidity, you'd think they'd make a few mistakes in our favor." They're trying to undercut Vice President Cheney because he is much more conservative, much more hawkish, than the President. He is their real enemy, and they know it. CNN (Communist New Network): "X Marx the spot" Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · November 23, 2005 02:44 PM X-rated? Merry Xmas? Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · November 23, 2005 02:45 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
A well-placed CNN insider claims a control room staffer "laughed" when the image appeared shortly after 11 am.
Are control room staffers supposed to laugh at their work product?
--
The appropriate reaction to an unexpected fiasco like that is a gasp and a look of dismay. If somebody laughed, somebody knew- or somebody doesn't give a damn about competent reporting.
Or both. I vote both.