The hypocracy of "standards":MSM Vs Alternative Media

Hello, today I was reading CNN as I do everyday, and I noticed there is a hypocracy in "standerds" in the context of MainStreamMedia vs Alternative Media

In mainstream media its ok to say this, AND I QUOTE

"The official declined to be identified, citing the extreme sensitivity of U.S. forces operating within Pakistan's borders."

How many times do we see this in the MSM???

""The official declined to be identified,"
www.cnn.com...


Honestly, Ive seen them use that one countless times.

But if you even use it once here, you will have a fate worse than death.

What a seeming hypocracy of standards tho, how is that possible?
Shouldn't people call them out on it more often?

Why should I believe them? They wont even name their so called "Source"

Hell that "souce" could be ANYONE LOL

Heres a fun project, lets see how many times we can find instances of MSM using "unidentified sources" , I bet we can find alot.


[edit on 4-9-2008 by muzzleflash]

Interesting thought muzzleflash but I thought you might be headed down a different path. I kept switching back and forth between CNN (Wolf Bonehead) and CSPAN last evening. I kept thinking "why is CNN even at the convention"? They didn't even show most of the speakers just blabbing and trashing the GOP. At one point Begala (sp) was outright laughing outloud with this smug elitist grin on his face. Anyway, back on topic CNN will pretty much say anything without substance to back it up. CSPAN was great and makes you realize how much BS we are fed by the MSM daily.

In the words of the immortal ICE-T:

"You gotta make the money first"
"Then when you get the money, you get the power"
"Then when you get the power, Then you get the woman"

They have the power to do what they want. Anyone who gets in their way is crushed by the very medium they were questioning. One cannot win unless one takes a very different and unique approach.