• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

WB+Netflix=$82.7 billion shocker!

Looks like Ellison wants to keep CNN’s status quo as it is…

That all depends on whether you believe this essential pull-quote from the Ellison interview:

"...editorial independence will absolutely be maintained. It’s maintained at CBS."
 
That doesn't read like a bad reputation, but rather a very accomplished woman. Got something to counter it---ideally something that people of all political views might find damaging to a reputation?
Sure. How she trotted out outright lies about the Libya tragedy to the media while NS Advisor, the obvious incompetent execution of foreign policy in general during that same time, the rise of ISIS and their taking of territory is a key example. The complete ineptness of multiple domestic policy initatives while she served as Domestic Policy Advisor in the Biden Administration.

Even The Atlantic, hardly a right wing source, had to note her utter failures.

 






True that sounds good on paper for CBS News and CNN to have "Editorial Independence" but how will that work in practice. We seen the drama at CBS News under chief editor Bari Weiss and how the chief editors blog "The Free Press" got merged into a part of that operation as seen here.
 
Sure. How she trotted out outright lies about the Libya tragedy to the media while NS Advisor,

Rice was Ambassador to the United Nations when she made those statements (she wouldn't be NSA until nine months later) and says she got bad information from the intelligence services.


It happens. If I had a dime for every Public Information Officer who told me something that he or she thought was true but wasn't because that's what they were told, I'd be a lot richer.

That said, the late Sen. John McCain, who I knew personally, didn't believe her. But he wasn't infallible, and there's no concrete evidence, presented by McCain or anyone else, that she knowingly lied.


the obvious incompetent execution of foreign policy in general during that same time, the rise of ISIS and their taking of territory is a key example.

NSA is not Secretary of State.

The complete ineptness of multiple domestic policy initatives while she served as Domestic Policy Advisor in the Biden Administration.

Gonna need to be more specific.

Even The Atlantic, hardly a right wing source, had to note her utter failures.


Well, let's be clear. The Headline "Susan Rice an Abysmal Failure at her Job" is the Ethopian Review's headline linking to an Atlantic article with a much more measured and sweeping view, which had its own headline: "A Withering Critique of Obama's National Security Council."


But---this piece is not the Atlantic noting "her utter failures"---it's Jeffrey Goldberg interviewing author David Rothkopf about his book National Insecurity: American Leadership in an Age of Fear.

DR: ...right now, under President Obama and Susan Rice, we are in the midst of a particularly dysfunctional period for the NSC.

JG: So this is really about Obama, in your mind?


DR: If Obama had any material management or foreign-policy experience prior to coming in to office or if he had the character of our stronger leaders on these issues—notably a more strategic than tactical orientation, more trust in his team, less risk aversion, etc.—she would be better off, as would we all. But his flaws are compounded by a system that lets him pick and empower those around him. So, if he chooses to surround himself with a small team of "true believers" who won't challenge him as all leaders need to be challenged, if he picks campaign staffers that maintain campaign mode, if he over-empowers political advisors at the expense of those with national-security experience, that takes his weaknesses and multiplies them by those of the team around him.

And whatever Susan Rice's many strengths are, she is ill-suited for the job she has.

Rothkopf, in fact, considered Rice to have a great many strengths, and the year before, published a piece saying that she had been cheated out of being Obama's Secretary of State over Benghazi. Essential pull-quote:

Rice, it must be said, was cheated out of a job for which she was well-qualified by a broken political system in Washington. She became a pawn in the campaign battle between the president she has ably served at the U.N. for the past four years and Republicans who sought to make her a scapegoat for the tragic mess that took place in Benghazi on September 11.

She did nothing wrong except to do what an administration spokesperson is supposed to do, present the unclassified facts of the case as they were known and as her colleagues in the White House, intelligence and diplomatic communities concluded they ought to be presented.

Sen. John McCain led the effort to block her possible nomination as secretary of state with the assistance of colleagues like Sens. Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte. The fact that this forced Rice to submit a letter to the president withdrawing her nomination reflects the amount of power our system gives even one or two senators who are intent on blocking or dragging out a nomination.

It may be a testimony to McCain’s influence and his tenacity. It will certainly not be seen as a high water mark in his distinguished career. His opposition was petty, partisan, disproportionate to the facts of the Benghazi case that he used to frame his opposition, and inconsistent with the spirit that should prevail when a president presents or even floats his choice for a job as one of his top advisers.

 
Sure. How she trotted out outright lies about the Libya tragedy to the media

Regardless, she remains a director at Netflix The CEO of the company used the opportunity to soak the president for a personal investment of $1.5 million. If the president is so angry at Netflix, why was he willing to put his own money in a company that has Susan Rice as a director?

 
And, as Daily Kos notes in an editorial, Ellison's past actions belie his words.

Its more than that now given that the Ellisons are letting Bari Weiss run the news coverage while the war in Iran takes place.



Newsroom critics are reportedly unhappy with CBS News’s handling of the Iran war so far, accusing recently installed editor-in-chief Bari Weiss of carrying out a “propaganda-palooza” on behalf of the Trump administration’s military campaign.

Insiders told the news site Zeteo they’ve been concerned over multiple instances, including Weiss tweeting a fire emoji above a segment where a guest slammed leftist New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani for criticizing the war.

Another source told the site that a recent summary of U.S.-Iran relations from CBS News anchor Tony Dokoupil, which neglected to mention the 1953 U.S.-backed coup in the country, was the “craziest s*** I’ve ever seen.”
 
Suggesting the law will be upheld isn't strident or inflammatory and exercising her right to free speech isn't an awful decision or horrible judgement. And no government that isn't engaging in bribery or extortion should find her comments concerning in any way.
Sadly, it seems like we have about a quarter of our population who does think it is "strident or inflammatory" to suggest such a thing -- or, to the point, they are deeply offended by the idea that the law is anything other than whatever the Trump administration says it is at the moment.

But I think it is a safe bet that Susan Rice will outlast the Trump administration.
 
For the time being. Likely not for too much longer.

Sounds like wishful thinking. Why would you wish bad things for people?

Now Netflix is free from the debt the WBD deal could have created:


Plus some are speculating that Netflix might buy some of the assets Paramount may have to sell due to its debt.
 
Why would you wish bad things for people?
It's an analysis of what is likely to occur, not a wish one way or the other.

When a Director exhibits such poor judgement, the Board has no choice but to consider that. Her personal views or politics matter not to me. Were I a Netflix shareholder and/or Board member, I would be very concerned about her clear inability to consider her activity in the midst of a strategic merger that requires Government approval.
 
When a Director exhibits such poor judgement, the Board has no choice but to consider that.

There was no "poor judgement." They knew her views when she was asked to join the board. They knew she does interviews. The comments she made were factual and truthful. So there's no issue at all to the company or the board. Especially now that the company has left the bidding, and been paid $2.8 billion by Paramount. It's something you're making up completely. What was it she said that showed "poor judgement?" Government approval should be based on the company, not politics. People still have freedom of speech in this country.

I'd suggest the president exhibited "poor judgement" by spending $1.5 million of his own money buying debt in a company that he knew was involved in a merger that required approval by his government. But grift and corruption are nothing new to him.
 
It's an analysis of what is likely to occur, not a wish one way or the other.

When a Director exhibits such poor judgement, the Board has no choice but to consider that. Her personal views or politics matter not to me. Were I a Netflix shareholder and/or Board member, I would be very concerned about her clear inability to consider her activity in the midst of a strategic merger that requires Government approval.

And once again (screen goes all wavy, harp music plays):

Here's the key quote from Susan Rice on the Preet Bharara podcast:

“You know, companies already are starting to hear they better preserve their documents. They better be ready for subpoenas. If they’ve done something wrong, they’ll be held accountable, and if they haven’t broken the law, good for them,” Rice said.

Suggesting the law will be upheld and exercising her right to free speech isn’t poor judgement. And no government that isn't engaging in bribery or extortion should find her comments concerning in any way.

IF those comments could interfere with government approval of a deal, it pretty ****ing well proves her point.

Full story:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5748439-susan-rice-trump-corporations-accountability/
 


Back
Top Bottom