Yeah, CNN's been heading towards Fox Lite territory for some time now. Fareed Zakaria's show is the only thing on that network worth watching anymore.

Its a race to the bottom. And Glenn Beck, Faux, CNN, et al... continue to dig.

Someone is surprised that the Cretins' News Network is the Cretins' News Network??

So what are you saying... that CNN, which has historically been fairly supportive of democratic leaders and policies, is now changing?

Would that be because they are consistently coming in behind Fox in the ratings game and want to improve their position by being more "Fox-like"?

Or is it that CNN does not agree with a number of current administration positions, initiatives, actions, etc. and are editorializing about that?

Or something else?

More analysis needed...

As long as conservative owned media (which is almost all media) pays no price for lies and deceit as infotainment they have no incentive to change their bad behavior. No, it probably can't be proven as some double triple secret conspiracy but it's very clear that a conservative idealogical agenda is served out of all proportion to the alleged audience being fed this pap.

I seem to remember my college profs being more interested in students asking the right questions, questions which derive from familiarity with the subject at hand.

What we see in this kind of journalism is an attempt to build a story by ignoring information or context.

In a sense, it is like the "breaking news" trick, go with a story before you have enough information to find out there is nothing interesting to report. Maybe they could rename it potential news.

When the media turn away from its constitutionally protected enterprise of providing information by getting the story first, but making sure it is gotten accurately and in its fullest context, such media will have become a danger to a democratic society! -Kevo

I used to think it was weird that they were so generous with the Bush administrations recklessness with the truth, not questioning very aggressively, giving too much benefit of the doubt--but now, on a daily basis, I can see their attempts polemics to distort the context of the Obama administration, and steer the subtext towards an unflattering perspective and it is obvious that they have a clear political agenda. They are Corporate Fascists through and through. I won't watch their shows or visit their web site. The phrase Enemy of the People springs to mind.

CNN used to be a liberalish Ted Turner operation, who owns and runs it now? We should find out ...

Did Obama "bow" and what does it mean? I've watched, and I say maybe so and maybe not. If it was a bow, Obama was trying to be culturally hip and doesn't deserve ragging on, just because it's been "tradition" for X years not to bow. (But if so, I'd rather his camp just say, "Yeah it was, wanna make something of it?"

I have a case for "not a bow": Note how far away he was from Abdullah when he reached over to shake (presuming he did shake)? If someone is shorter, you have to bend down some to connect right. Also, by definition a "bow" does not include a handshake anyway, but the dextrobloggers are all arguing about whether Obama really shook with one or two hands etc.

Finally, another aspect of bowing is, you turn your face down - if Obama looked right at Abdullah, and shook hands, it's not nearly so significant whether he leaned down (i.e., with his back) in the process.

PS folks, here's footage of Bush bowing to Abdullah albeit to receive a medal:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/33289_Bush_Bowed_Too/comments/#ctop.
Then W kisses with the King (but at least, no teabagging - yet I'm sure they shared some of the invigorating brew so popular in the Eastern world ...) Heh, even LGF are ragging on Bush there!

To put this in the context of the how seriously it should be taken, someone should point out that Superman DID, in the end, kneel before Zod.

CNN is merely providing balance between conventional "fact based" news reporting and the far right (OK way off the charts) lunacy of FOX. They've clearly hit that "sweet" spot of fictionalized yet seemingly rational reporting.

Gibbs should revisit the topic and provide a video clip of Bush smooching and handholding. That wd not only put the reporter in his place but guarantee the clip was on every news program and unleash a debate on alleged reporters wasting everyone's time with wingnut talking points.

The right wing complains that Obama bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia because they think he should have kissed the King's ass, like George W. Bush did.

Steve Benen wrote: "Right, but that only matters if your goal is to present the public with accurate information."

Could it be?

Is it possible?

Could Steve Benen be awakening to the reality that the handful of giant corporations that own CNN and the rest of the mass media in America are not interested in "presenting the public with accurate information" but rather in propagandizing the public in furtherance of their corporate agenda?

Which at present is to undermine public support for and confidence in the Obama administration?

Oh, please let it be so.

Maybe he will even start calling corporate-owned Republicans and their corporate-owned media allies LIARS instead of "silly" and "crazy" when they tell deliberate, calculated, malicious LIES?

shorter Obama: While we remain vigilant against terrorism, it'd be a good idea if we stopped calling people of Middle Eastern descent "sand n*ggers."

shorter cnn: why are you so eager to give this country away to the terrorists?

> Remember, this wasn't Fox News; it was CNN.

Was it before or after the feature segment about Matt Damon's new hairstyle?

I don't know why you give them any credit for having integrity. It's about as much of a brainless entertainment channel as fox is an RNC talking points channel.

Where're the management memos calling for more "fair and balanced" reporting? Animist's drill is right on, but here it's middle management - who's calling the day-to-day shots? There you'll find the rub.....

CNN is owned by Time Warner. I remember reading over two years ago of the appointment of a new vice president whose entire job description was to find ways of capturing viewers from Fox. Only two ways to do that: convince the Fox viewers to become more liberal, or take CNN to the right. Mission accomplishing -- just look at their so-called experts. Most of them aren't even as liberal as Time.

Let's not be ridiculous here. Obama bowed. For anybody on the left - including the White House - to say otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.

Let's get rid of the phrase "alleged bow" and just be honest. He bowed. It was wrong. That said, it's just not that big of a deal.

I agree it was an awkward one-handed handshake bow. Other than wingnutmania, who cares?

To curtsey, bow, kiss a cheek, kiss a ring, et. al., are jestures towards leaders of bygone eras. The outrage isn't about the jesture; it's about a jesture of respect towards a muslim leader.

The first thing that occurred to me reading the headline was that of course CNN would act like Faux Gnus. They've been modeling themselves on the Murdoch business model for years now. Why should you expect anything different?

Then I saw that the same thought occurred to everyone else, so I'll just add my vote to the overwhelming landslide.

The other night Frontline aired a program called 'Black Money' in which footage was shown of Margaret Thatcher doing a sort of curtsy-bow to the Saudis. Someone really ought to dig that up and post a picture of it.

"it's about a jesture of respect towards a muslim leader. "

Bullcrap. Bush held the guys hand like they were highschool sweethearts, and Bush's dad fought an entire war on behalf of the King's dad. The whole thing is manufactured and the only itch it's scratches is the "uppity black man too big for his britches" itch.

if anyone knows how to act towards royalty...

its a republican..

appletree: "...To curtsey, bow, kiss a cheek, kiss a ring, et. al., are jestures towards leaders of bygone eras. The outrage isn't about the jesture; it's about a jesture of respect towards a muslim leader..."

Why didn't or isn't the right clucking about Margaret Thatcher curtsy-bowing to the Saudis? I'd really like to see photos of that posted on left blogs right now.