- Reaction score
- 5,014
- Points
- 1,160
So do I. The US violently rejected royalty then created their own in all but name.I find the whole dog thing for presidents a bit odd but I guess it fits in with American family culture.
So do I. The US violently rejected royalty then created their own in all but name.I find the whole dog thing for presidents a bit odd but I guess it fits in with American family culture.
A curiousity....
![]()
CBS faces uproar after seizing investigative journalist’s files
The position of CBS has alarmed many, including the union, as an attack on free press principles by one of the nation’s most esteemed press organizations.thehill.com
Oh nice... I wonder how many sources or whistleblowers will be willing to risk speaking with journalists now when their files can just be grabbed by the corporation. You know nothing good will come of this. Sends a message, doesn't it? The fourth estate was dead long ago, this is just another verification of that.
aahhhh Arec Baldrin......Oh, so not the Film Actors Guild?
View attachment 83330
NOT a good look on CBS/Paramout Global.A curiousity....
![]()
CBS faces uproar after seizing investigative journalist’s files
The position of CBS has alarmed many, including the union, as an attack on free press principles by one of the nation’s most esteemed press organizations.thehill.com
Thats why this extremely competent journalist was laid off. Back to FOX?CBS faces uproar after seizing investigative journalist’s files
The timing of Herridge’s termination immediately raised suspicions in Washington. She was pursuing stories that were unwelcomed by the Biden White House and many Democratic powerhouses, including the Hur report on Joe Biden’s diminished mental capacity, the Biden corruption scandal and the Hunter Biden laptop. She continued to pursue these stories despite reports of pushback from CBS executives, including CBS News President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews.
NOT a good look on CBS/Paramout Global.
Sadly, though, this is the private sector, so fruits of the employee tree tend to be property of the company. When I was reorged from one private media company to another, I didn't get to bring my files with me. When I got laid off from a private sector media outlet, I didn't get to bring all my files with me.
Given the types of files in question, I'm sure legal would have had some ... concerns? given the current political environment. If she couldn't take her stuff with her, destroying the files would have been an even worse look.
More on this one (including from the House Judiciary Committee) ...
![]()
The theory as to why Paramount ‘laid off’ journalist Catherine Herridge – a known thorn of Biden administration
Catherine Herridge, one of 800 people who was laid off from Paramount Global, specifically at CBS News, could have been fired due to her connection with the Biden’s as new theories emerge.nypost.com
... with more on Herridge's X feed (don't be surprised if the handle changes shortly)![]()
House Judiciary Committee launches probe into CBS firing, seizing files of veteran reporter covering Hunter Biden’s laptop scandal
The House Judiciary Committee is calling CBS on the carpet over the firing of veteran reporter Catherine Herridge, who was probing the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, and the subsequent seizure of her personal records, The Post has learned.judiciary.house.gov
This has been a brouhaha in the US for a few days now. People in media, and at CBS in particular, have alleged that it's customary for people to retain their files. Customs might differ between countries. The US has, and continues to have, much stronger traditions of freedom of expression.Sadly, though, this is the private sector, so fruits of the employee tree tend to be property of the company. When I was reorged from one private media company to another, I didn't get to bring my files with me. When I got laid off from a private sector media outlet, I didn't get to bring all my files with me.
This has been a brouhaha in the US for a few days now. People in media, and at CBS in particular, have alleged that it's customary for people to retain their files. Customs might differ between countries. The US has, and continues to have, much stronger traditions of freedom of expression.
Apparently CBS has already modified its position. However, a secondary controversy was that her documents would contain information about sources, whose confidentiality she has so far successfully protected. If someone has already had time to go through the stuff and pass info along to those who were seeking it, damage is done.
I'm far from current on the latest precedents, but if I was counsel for a source whose identity was leaked, I would argue that a reporter working for a media outlet often (not always) has to get higher-up OK with withholding the identity of a source (couldn't tell you if this is a general practice or if it varied from outlet to outlet - I suspect any outlet big enough to have a legal department would lean this way). If that's the case, the protection comes not from the journalist but from the entity 1) employing the journalist, and 2) taking the final risk publishing information based on sources they won't name. That could make the outlet liable. Again, I'm no legal beagle, so I also stand to be corrected.My understanding is similar. A journalistic source has a trust relationship with the individual journalist (and maybe their editor), not the news outlet writ large. There are major issues not just with accessing the source, but protecting the source. That’s as big a deal for journalists as it is for police in some cases.
Yup - but also remember, like private media companies here, CBS's main deliverable is entertainment/"eyes on" and its job is to make money, so I gotta wonder how that was juggled with the different concepts of "protecting sources" in this case.This has been a brouhaha in the US for a few days now. People in media, and at CBS in particular, have alleged that it's customary for people to retain their files. Customs might differ between countries. The US has, and continues to have, much stronger traditions of freedom of expression ...
I'm far from current on the latest precedents, but if I was counsel for a source whose identity was leaked, I would argue that a reporter working for a media outlet often (not always) has to get higher-up OK with withholding the identity of a source (couldn't tell you if this is a general practice or if it varied from outlet to outlet - I suspect any outlet big enough to have a legal department would lean this way). If that's the case, the protection comes not from the journalist but from the entity 1) employing the journalist, and 2) taking the final risk publishing information based on sources they won't name. That could make the outlet liable. Again, I'm no legal beagle, so I also stand to be corrected.
Another fine point is how some outlets say she was "fired" and others say she was "laid off" with others being out processed. For-cause processes may lead to different file handling practices than just being cut like one of the herd being culled because not enough money is being made.
Still, not a good look for the network some still remember this guy gracing ....
View attachment 83376
Yup - but also remember, like private media companies here, CBS's main deliverable is entertainment/"eyes on" and its job is to make money, so I gotta wonder how that was juggled with the different concepts of "protecting sources" in this case.
Have we gone beyond "apparently" yet and do we have some solid evidence that the "last shred of credibility" has died?AG James apparently made a social media post to state the amount of Trump's fine, and followed up a day later with one stating a "plus" amount.
And with that died the last shred of credibility of anyone claiming the prosecution isn't politically motivated.
Either this is her on X, or it isn't.Have we gone beyond "apparently" yet and do we have some solid evidence that the "last shred of credibility" has died?
Asking for some friends.
Now I know what you are talking about, but the post merely expresses the total amount of the judgement owed including interest. See here:Either this is her on X, or it isn't.
![]()
With judgment entered in Trump fraud case, clock starts on his $454M penalty
The clerk for New York County's Supreme Court has entered the judgment order in former President Trump's civil fraud case, starting the clock on his $454 million penalty.abcnews.go.com
I suspect there is more going here.