CNN Fires Producer Over Personal Blog

dangerz writes "CNN has fired one of its producers because of his personal blog. Chez Paziena, the ex-producer, has stated that he started the blog 'mostly to pass the time, hone my writing skills, resurrect my voice a little, and keep my mind sharp following the [brain tumor] surgery.' After a few months, CNN found out about it and ended up letting him go because his 'name was "attached to some, uh, 'opinionated' blog posts" circulating around the internet.'"

Re:The dude violated a policy he admitted he read.

[Anonymous Coward]

He also read this policy quite recently, before getting fired but long after starting his blog. RTFA or GTFO.

Democracy Now!

[srobert]

"Are there any respectable news sources left on US TV?"

Yes. You could watch Democracy Now with Amy Goodman on Link TV or Freespeech TV. They come in on satellite at least. I think the local cable company where I live has blocked them out.

Re:They don't like competition

[milsoRgen]

Maybe CNN doesn't like the competition scattered independent bloggers are providing to its all-encompassing media empire, and are taking out their anger on one of their own who dared embrace new media?

I think it has more to do with the fact he used his real name, said some stuff that is okay by /.'r standards but was defiantly pretty racy to your average CNN view and as well he knew that he was suppose to get his outside work okayed with standards & practices. Really there is nothing to see here, the guy had it coming. IMO

Re:Three words

[Dr Caleb]

Remember when two guys with a typewriter took down a US President - and used their real names.

Re:The dude violated a policy he admitted he read.

[cp.tar]

Throughout history, there have been many kinds of slavery. Some were at least semi-voluntary, and ended after an agreed-upon time period.
Much like contracts of today.

Re:Democracy Now!

[Just Some Guy]

You could watch Democracy Now with Amy Goodman

Let's try that again: are there any respectable news sources that aren't blatantly anti-conservative? I just looked at the web page for that show, and every story was about which Democrat will be nominated, and how Bush is trying to kill or take over the world. Literally. For example, here are the Monday headlines:

• In Tight Democratic Race, Could Campaign Donations and Personal Views Influence Potentially Decisive Superdelegate Vote?
• Analyst: On Africa Visit, Bush Pushes Agenda of Continent-Wide U.S. Military Expansion
• In Africa, Bush Touts Record AIDS Relief under his Administration, but Funding Restrictions Tell a Different Story on the Ground
• Seton Hall Law Students Discover U.S. Military Routinely Videotaping Gitmo Interrogations

I think I'll stick with The Daily Show, and maybe try BBC World News America. Those can't be any worse than the CNN or Fox jackasses.

Re:Democracy Now!

[VellonIssachar]

I concur. I lost respect for Democracy Now when they started interviewing 9/11 crazies.

Re:Democracy Now!

[ystar]

I find PBS to be quite level-headed, but I'm speaking as someone quite opposed to the current administration. Bill Moyer's Journal is great, and probably free online, as are most PBS shows. Frontline has also continually improved their coverage of in-depth issues lately.

Small correction

[FoolsGold]

The guy's name is Chez Pazienza, not Paziena.

Perhaps Slashdot could employ a little professionalism themselves. Oh, who am I kidding! :)

Agreed about PBS

[srobert]

PBS coverage is excellent. But it used to be that PBS was "viewer supported television", without advertising.
Now too many PBS shows begin with "was made possible by a grant from Exxon Mobil", or some such corporate giant.
They're definitely trying to influence the coverage. (Or does that make it sound like I'm wearing a tin-foil hat?)

Re:Democracy Now!

[TitusC3v5]

Though it's not quite television, I've found NPR to cover both sides of the spectrum fairly evenly. Best of all, you can simply listen to it while using your eyes for more productive things.

Re:Democracy Now!

[uimedic]

He got fired for repeatedly publishing opinion on the Huffington Post. His blog was part of the problem, but the firing offense was publishing opinion _regularly_ at the HP. The handbook said that he could not write for non-approved outlets - and the HP is definitely an outlet.

Re:Democracy Now!

[mshomphe]

Please point out the reasonable Republicans. Moreover, please point out those "less government is better conservatives" who haven't spent the last 8 years supporting George W. Bush's rampant expansion of the federal government.

Re:Democracy Now!

[crdotson]

In the US, the first amendment only covers what the government does, not a nongovernmental entity like CNN. Of course, that does not mean that they aren't assholes for firing him, but it doesn't violate constitutional freedom of speech. Emphasis mine:

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Re:Democracy Now!

[rohan972]

Moreover, please point out those "less government is better conservatives" who haven't spent the last 8 years supporting George W. Bush's rampant expansion of the federal government.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ [ronpaul2008.com]

As to your reasonable requirement, that depends very much on your point of view.