02-04-2011, 04:05 PM
MSNBC did a story on this today. Alex Witt spoke for three or four minutes with a woman from the Boston Herald about why the show was controversial. They pecked around the periphery but never really spoke about what exactly made the show so controversial. The best they could do was say it showed JFK's philandering but that his philandering wasn't anything new. Surnow was allowed to come on and say the work was actually "reverent" of Kennedy.
MSNBC once again fails to deliver honest content. Nowhere was the viewer clued to the fact that the show was disliked because it was yet another smear job of Kennedy based on his sexual misadventures in coordination with the upcoming anniversary and that the program's main purpose was to draw attention away from the building evidence of the CIA assassination of the president.
In effect, as usual, MSNBC presents a piece that assumes to be critical journalism but ends up dodging the main issue and working as a favorable advertisement for a pro-government hit piece.
MSNBC once again fails to deliver honest content. Nowhere was the viewer clued to the fact that the show was disliked because it was yet another smear job of Kennedy based on his sexual misadventures in coordination with the upcoming anniversary and that the program's main purpose was to draw attention away from the building evidence of the CIA assassination of the president.
In effect, as usual, MSNBC presents a piece that assumes to be critical journalism but ends up dodging the main issue and working as a favorable advertisement for a pro-government hit piece.