Thread: Email CNN.com to oppose Navarette editorials.

I am not concerned whether your e-mails work or not I am not "jumping" in because of that. I am not agreeing with what Navarrette wrote or his views. I think it is pretty clear what my stance is on this thread. Freedom of Speech. I may not post a lot on the threads but I am no stranger to them either, If I feel that something is wrong I will post.
"In free countires, every man is entitled to express his opinions and every other man is entitled not to listen"
G. Norman Collie

I agree with iamtired, there is the freedom of speech in this country it is a oped/commentary piece on cnn.com, pieces that are allowed on newpapers like is says at the bottom of the piece he writes for a newspaper, which probably has ties to CNN, which would not be surprising with media consolidation.

I don't disagree about free speech but the overwhelming hypocrisy here is that CNN and probably such open minded people like you I am sure would NEVER give say someone like David Duke a forum like they do Navarette.

Do not judge me, about what I would allow or not.
Why not give him a editorial? David Duke in my opinion is a horrible man and I would hope many of you would agree. But if he were given an editorial it does not mean you have to agree with him. And I am sure that many people would oppose him as they should and as they have.
And show me where Navarrette states some sort of "Hispanic superemacy" like Duke did about "white supremacy".

Navarette is no less horrible. A racist with a column. You boldly support a racist like Navarette's free speech yet jump on the evil supremacist Duke.
One way racism...

I don't support either one's opinions. I support freedom of speech. I was just on David Duke's website and on Navarrette's they both have freedom of speech because they are both putting their opinion's out there. Why is Navarrette on CNN.com well because immigration is a hot topic right now. David Duke is not a columnist Navarette is. Yet, both have websites David Duke has a radio show, books, articles. And they are freely accesable to anyone who wishes to see them. And I may not agree with him he has the right to have them and I have the choice to agree or not to agree or read it or not to read it.

Agreed with everything you just said but my whole point was that it's not really free speech. CNN who is incredibly biased gives a forum to a racist like Navarette that they'd NEVER give to someone espousing support to the white race or white causes. How many national publications is Navarette published in? Mr Brown Pride get a free pass but they'd never offer a regular slot to someone espousing the same about White Pride. Racism is racism. Either it is bad for all or good for all. One way or the other. Can't be good free speech for Brown Pride and Bad Free speech for White Pride.

CNN may be biased just as much as FOX, there is probably some sort of consolidation between the paper Navarette write's for and CNN or something that is why he is on there and Duke may not be. And Duke just has bad rubs with the media from his past all that. I guess your right in what you said. But by agreeing that CNN.com is biased it pretty much sums up why he is on their site. And the reason he will probably continue to be there. Again there is the whole choice idea. We just have to be smart and critical about what is posted and stated. Even as a student journalists I agree that everyone should be critical of the media and what is stated, written etc. That doesn't mean shut the person up.

I would like to believe that all journalists defend freedom of speech and the truth.

Unfortunately they don't get to practice that ideal regularly. You have seen many postings here that discern bias in American papers due to corporate and political influence and editorial control. Like, for example, trace the number of articles, content, columns, op-eds, headlines, and placement of numerous illegal/Latino articles in the LA Times, The Chicago Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle, etc. vs. the conspicuous omission of equally relevant material on the opposing side of the argument, or for that matter, any regular representation by the ethnic white, black, or asian cultures with articles or columns justifying counter position. This consitutes a pattern that in itself can be rated.

Not only that, but there are cities that publish only a small fraction of coverage on the most important and passionate debate in this country in recent time -- illegal immigration and how it has changed America --- as if it didn't exist. This is another form of manipulation over the minds of American people. It can also be characterized as denial and good old CYA or even a blackout.

CNN is considered a quality program in the highest range of journalistic coverage. I believe the people on this board are concerned that CNN's influential impact would be tainted by the poor choice of front page print placement authored by the likes of Navarrette who is a scoundrel. A message in written form always carries more legitimacy than one that is spoken because it is a record, as well as becoming a historical and legitimate statement.....thus the power of print.

A newspaper columnist is in the employment of a periodical and therefore bears its masthead along with his or her message. They frequently consider themselves privileged because of democratic freedom to print but they're never completely immune. All licensed professional media is subject to close examination.

People here are not trying to silence Navarrette, they are trying to put him in his place.

The best thing to hurt Navarrette is to ignore him,

If you make a big deal out of his columns, his ratings will go up. when people complain, they newspapers know they are reaching subscribers. personally, i stopped reading his blather last year. In fact, I read less and less of the OBL newspaper every week.
Stop complaining about him and he'll die from obscurity

Arcley wrote:

Ok and CNN.com I can almost assure is not going to care. For the same reason I have been writing. I study this, I go to school for this. We discuss this in all my classes. I am journalism major, and I can assure you that the piece will not go off their site.

Don't underestimate the power of the people! You seem to forget Arcley, CNN knows where the bread is buttered. It does not benefit them to piss off their viewing public. I'm not saying they will halt future articles from Navarrette, but they'll certainly consider it if they think his articles are going to cost them viewership. Perhaps your journalism classes should teach you a little more about the American money machine and greed. Just a thought...........