Media Coverage: Enron vs. Oil-For Food
Interesting...
Enron represented a lot of the left in this country despises: Big business, oil companies, etc. Plus there was the connection between Ken Lay and the Bush family. What media outlet is going to miss an opportunity to stick it to the Bush's? It has gotten to the point that Enron is being held responsible for things that company really wasn't at fault for. The other day I was watching 60 Minutes at my girlfriend's house with her father. During a story about Ken Lay the reporter tried to draw a connection between California's power crisis and Enron. I pointed out that Enron really wasn't the cause of that crisis (though they were complicit in some shady dealings during the fallout) but rather that it was the ineptitude of Gray Davis' administration and the Democrat-dominated legislature which nearly brought that state's power grid to its knees. You should have heard my girlfriend's father go off (he's a Michael Moore Democrat). He was absolutely convinced of the idea that Enron caused all of California's power woes.
Conversely, the United Nations represents a lot of what the left holds near and dear: Bureaucracy, subtle anti-Americanism, etc. We shouldn't be at all surprised that Enron got way more attention than the oil-for-food scandal despite the fact that the latter shows every indication of being the largest case of fraud ever committed in the history of the world. The tentacles of the oil-for-food scandal run deep and are rooted in the governments of countries around the globe, yet from the type of coverage on the situation we've seen thus far it would seem as though the UN is going to get away with an "Ooops, we're sorry we won't do it again" defense.
Notice the care this New York Times editorial takes when treating Kofi Annan today, all hedged bets and mild condemnation. It's only Kojo, after all. Confined to those shifty Swiss. Not a big deal, besides the only people who care are the warmongers angry that Kofi wouldn't sign on to the Iraq war. Just do better next time.
In other words, par for the Kofi course.*
Now, Enron. Hang 'em high! Trust no one. Spare no one. Cast the net wide! Wider! The root of all evil. Crush all Imperial CEOs. Ken Lay - why wait for the trial? Even named a disease after it.
Enron represented a lot of the left in this country despises: Big business, oil companies, etc. Plus there was the connection between Ken Lay and the Bush family. What media outlet is going to miss an opportunity to stick it to the Bush's? It has gotten to the point that Enron is being held responsible for things that company really wasn't at fault for. The other day I was watching 60 Minutes at my girlfriend's house with her father. During a story about Ken Lay the reporter tried to draw a connection between California's power crisis and Enron. I pointed out that Enron really wasn't the cause of that crisis (though they were complicit in some shady dealings during the fallout) but rather that it was the ineptitude of Gray Davis' administration and the Democrat-dominated legislature which nearly brought that state's power grid to its knees. You should have heard my girlfriend's father go off (he's a Michael Moore Democrat). He was absolutely convinced of the idea that Enron caused all of California's power woes.
Conversely, the United Nations represents a lot of what the left holds near and dear: Bureaucracy, subtle anti-Americanism, etc. We shouldn't be at all surprised that Enron got way more attention than the oil-for-food scandal despite the fact that the latter shows every indication of being the largest case of fraud ever committed in the history of the world. The tentacles of the oil-for-food scandal run deep and are rooted in the governments of countries around the globe, yet from the type of coverage on the situation we've seen thus far it would seem as though the UN is going to get away with an "Ooops, we're sorry we won't do it again" defense.
goon
individual family
pparets
laydownSally
Puzzlefeet
The Whistler
