【已结束】原CNN驻北京首席记者Rebecca MacKinnon将作客Anti-CNN,问题征集ing

heracules

就我个人来说，懒得搭理，当然态度是不对的，也害怕自己压不住气氛破坏气氛

呼吁广大AC筒子们在友好礼貌的气氛下好好的“质问”她一下，为什么西方媒体人那样无耻

不屈的人

Hello, dear woman, today I with a special feeling for you to ask you a question. Excuse me, how do you think of our website and CNN, the relationship between what meaning，please？
Thank you.

元素

是象中国人介绍CNN如何造假吗

wwh710

As she had been a reporter of CNN　in Asia and China, we can somewhere understand the diffrence atitude on humanity, culture and even policy,  but we still  are very baffled about the report method and direction that is really so far away from ours sight?
If there exist an invisible hand  on the direction of their report ? Or maybe  the hand invisible is really invisible that just little big potato know how it works?
About better relationship between China and US, especially the relationship between people of the two countries, what we should do and what should be done by the goverment？
About the Olimpic torch relay problems occured in US last year, what about the most US people's attitude, they have so much desire to trouble our feelings and how much they know the reality of Tibet on history?

bnyt2000

请问，如果中国要建一个世界级的媒体，比如半岛或CNN，第一次海湾战争时的CNN，让您来参谋，您会给什么样的建议？

草根微言

我不想用意识形态啦，妖魔化啦，反XX拉来让女士解释什么。看来女士是对西方媒体的报道方式有过一些反思的。包括女士在内，一直讲客观公正挂在嘴边上，并始终强调着西方媒体的道德性是高于所谓极权国家的官方媒体的，强调着独立媒体的重要性。问题就在这里了，用什么来保持所谓独立媒体的客观性？自律？按照包括女士在内的绝大多数所谓自由主义人士所接受认可的学理，权力必然带来腐败，不管是独立媒体也好、自由声音也罢，只要成为了所谓权威媒体，成了什么“第四权”，拥有了话语权，不就必然导致客观的丧失？
不要用什么共权力私权力来解释，政府固然拥有公权力易导致大多民众的利益损失，媒体的这种话语权同样引导着民众的舆论，在所谓独立思考的口号下，这种更为隐性的控制、煽动所带来的破坏性早已为人所共知。但是谁来制约媒体？是靠所谓多元容忍？任由错误的信息引导民众形成错误的意识？就像现在的西方媒体的集体无意识行为？是靠有心的政治人物持续宣导，并形成特定媒体的特定受众之间反复的、强烈的对抗？就像现在的ACER与另一些人们？
其实很简单，不需要女士解释，女士牌也解释不了，女士所持的所谓学理的虚伪性、冲突性是客观存在的，也是女士这类人一直闪避的，回答不了，解决不了的。
只是告诉这位女士，不要用存在内心的，自我认定的所谓道德高点来碰触问题，仅此而已。

baozin2002

26# 草根微言

问：1，中国媒体如何争取这个话语权呢？ 矿大对世界的影响力？

2，在西方是观众影响媒体观点，还是媒体影响观众呢？我想后者多一点吧！

3，在美国，政府干预媒体的情况有没有呢，会像台湾那样不同的政党控制不同的媒体吗？

红色的血

我想提个关于性观念的问题,性和人关系密切所以它必然影响人的价值观.自性自由进入中国后好象性自由就等于了性放纵.其衍生和发展的价值就是我干什么都行你无权干涉,或者宣扬有悖主流的价值就是高尚的,我想问问在美国什么是性自由,什么是性放纵,性自由和性忠贞的关系.
主持人一定要问问这一价值观的问题

红色的血

就如为什么无视中国方面的说法?为什么你们的媒体镜头无视海外留学生抗议?如果没有包围圈那么为什么在指出了报导的错误后还是屡屡无视继续我行我素?
以下是牢骚:
说公正其实都带有目的性特别是政治性新闻.这涉及到国家利益或者说他们的价值利益.就如她不可能承认反华包围圈一样,如果承认了那家媒体就没有存在性了违反了自己标榜的东西.说公正西方媒体说你的说法也报导了,但是也可分主流报纸和小报,封面和中缝吧.达赖的耍赖和总理反击在西媒的待遇就知道了.就如一个网站把某一个新闻推在封面做大彩图,而另一个相反的观点藏在层层链接中,然后大喊我都发了.所以我是公正的.........哈哈

中国的骑士

我没问题...只想感叹一下...AC的越来越牛了..什么人都能请到

朝露晨光

很想知道，CNN那些关于西藏的新闻，到底是怎么写出来的。新闻的来源是什么？撰写新闻稿件的记者，是否真的看到他文字中写的那些事情？
为什么CNN关于西藏的报道，总是选择性失明？

gavien_1

很想知道为什么西方一些媒体对中国会有一种莫名其妙的优越感?

sevensky

之前您的博客中有提到说CNN由于人手和资金的原因，所以很多报道都交给实习生来做，也因此新闻的质量有所下降。所以我想问：
1、作为媒体，作为一个输出思想传播信息的权威机构，对新闻质量的掌控就是根据“因为都是实习生”这样的客观原因来摇摆？因为是实习生，所以对于那些错误的报道群众就可以原谅，或者说由于这些错误报道所造成的群众印象就可以不追究？
2、究竟西方媒体是怎样理解“新闻”这个概念的？CNN的新闻公平性到底在哪里？有些问题可以用道歉来摆平，但是道歉多了，就不值钱了。

hitoku2006

美国的媒体管制问题。CNN在伊拉克战争前期和后期报道中，是否有帮助美国政府煽动民众情绪、为政府开脱的事实？

赛赛

可以说CNN现在是一个全球性的媒体，很多国家都可以收到CNN的节目，那么请问CNN有没有做好为全球的受众负责的准备？是否已经成长为一个成熟的全球性媒体？
另外一个问题属于比较私人性质的，您离开CNN的原因主要是哪方面的？是价值观的不同？还是出于个人职业发展规划的考虑？

中国尊严08

In your own blog about you being misrepresented by a CNN intern, you seem to be suggesting that what some chinese perceived as unfair/dishonest reporting on China is the result of the lacking of experienced staff/man-power.

Perhaps that was  the case for the infamous cropped photo, but then certainly not the case for Mr. Cafferty's derison of China and Chinese people ("goons and thugs", a place "where you can pay workers a dollar a month")--he is an old in the business.

It should be emphasized that anti-cnn came into existence not because of that photo; it came to counteract the unjust  and self-righteous western media, especially in the aftermath of tibet riots.

What is appalling to me is that main-stream western media did not bother to go through the formality of condemning the violence of tiban rioters; no sympathy for the 8-month-old baby who was burned to death with his parents, and for the 5 girls killed in the same way; a lot of sympathy for "tibet cause". In fact, these media did not want to let their countrymen know these tragedies(I did not see any articles mentioning the tragedies).

My question: how do you explain the behavior of main stream western media in the aftermath of the riots that I described above?

GordonLam

你是否认同美国媒体对共产主义国家（包括中国、古巴等）具有天生的成见？
如果你觉得成见存在的话，请问你是怎么看包括CNN在内的美国媒体倾向性的今后发展的？是否会更加极端？
如果你觉得成见不存在的话，请问你又会怎么解释这种中国人的“错觉”？

superstar

有人说过，要让CNN不再对中国如西藏事件那样CNN，就要让中国人成为CNN的股东，或者成为CNN最主体的观众。您如何看待这个问题？？

中国尊严08

37# 中国尊严08

楼主请注意: 我的上贴中有4个拼写错误和遗漏；现更改如下:

In your own blog about you being misrepresented by a CNN intern, you seem to be suggesting that what some chinese perceived as unfair/dishonest reporting on China is the result of the lacking of experienced staff/man-power. Perhaps that was  the case for the infamous cropped photo, but then certainly not the case for Mr. Cafferty's derision of China and Chinese people ("goons and thugs", a place "where you can pay workers a dollar a month")--he is an old hand in the business. It should be emphasized that anti-cnn came into existence not because of that photo; it came to counteract the unjust  and self-righteous western media, especially in the aftermath of tibet riots. What is appalling to me is that main-stream western media did not even bother to go through the formality of condemning the violence of tibetan rioters; no sympathy for the 8-month-old baby who was burned to death with his parents, and for the 5 girls killed in the same way; a lot of sympathy for "tibet cause". In fact, these media did not want to let their countrymen know these tragedies(I did not see any articles mentioning the tragedies). My question: how do you explain the behavior of main stream western media in the aftermath of the riots that I described above?