tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post3497587650579844110..comments2024-03-18T04:36:26.547-04:00Comments on Paul Levinson's Infinite Regress: Olbermann vs. Koppel: I Mostly Agree with OlbermannPaul Levinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07609987407926836519noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-58788491769518980912010-11-17T21:22:20.289-05:002010-11-17T21:22:20.289-05:00I am still not sure on whose side I am on this deb...I am still not sure on whose side I am on this debate. However, I agree overall with Keith's point that newsmen of yesteryear, had to be guardians of the news and "tell us" what we needed to know, and therefore, by that fact alone, interjected their opinions into the coverage. You can not believe a War is good and true forever, such as the War in Vietnam, after Cronkite destroys its foundations. And so on...<br /><br />However, the larger point here is the objectivity of truth. Truth does not have sides. There is no Republican or Democratic side to the truth. There is no Right or Wrong equivalency to truth. Therefore, if I turn on a TV station that presents itself as a news organization and they are telling me that the President of the United States of America is a Muslim born in Kenya, I am supposed to swallow that wholesale? Obviously not.<br /><br />So, in broad terms I agree with Ted, but mostly I agree with Keith. I don't think Keith is as partisan as people want to make him out to be. He's certainly very emotional about what he believes, and he has twisted some issues, but I have never, ever heard him lie. To me, there has never been an equivalency between FOX News and MSNBC.M.P. Andoneehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01470972197953423108noreply@blogger.com