- cross-posted to:
- theguardian_us@ibbit.at
- cross-posted to:
- theguardian_us@ibbit.at
On Thursday evening, as rumors about the Brown University gunman swirled, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins posted on social media, noting the confusion and directing people to her network’s 9pm newscast.
CNN is certainly not a flawless news source, but her words rang true to me. The network is one of the outlets where you can find reality-based and largely dependable reporting – especially in breaking news situations like the one that was developing near a New Hampshire storage facility.
But CNN, now 45 years old, is in a precarious situation as two huge media conglomerates vie for ownership of its parent company, Warner Bros Discovery.
Whatever the outcome, the fate of CNN has become part of a high-stakes game of corporate ownership, not as a question of what benefits the information-seeking public.
Which has been an ongoing problem in the industry for quite some time.



Framing it as “moral panic” is disingenuous. It’s just people who love money more than community having found a way to exert control by distracting from what’s actually going on.
I agree in a sense buy I am not invested in framing it as a moral panic I am just pointing out the fact that it is clearly a moral panic.
According to whom? If this is “clearly” the case, how am I unaware of it?
Have you heard of a place called Australia before?
Mate, I’ve been to Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra and Adelaide.