Comments on: CNN producer says he was fired for blogging

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:02:56 +0000

It WAS the Cheese Nibblers Network after all

Que Sera Sera. Now he can do better crap..

By: justme

justme — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:42:06 +0000

sure, there are rules.
but cnn went beyond the call of duty.
a reprimand? sure.
but not this.
chez is brilliant.
he’ll end up with something bigger

By: tdc

tdc — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:24:59 +0000

yeah, people REALLY want to read about a woman who happens to get her high heel stuck in a sewer grate while a ‘real journalist’ who happens to blog (and has commented on this thread twice about STANDARDS) observed her on his lunch hour. sure.

i’ll withhold the blogger’s name. but suffice it to say, you wonder why people gravitate AWAY from such neutral tripe?

By: oakling

oakling — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 02:12:37 +0000

Principles before personalities. All he had to do was ask for permission, and instead he got fired and then came up with a bunch of rationalizations about whether it would have been different if he had been blogging on MySpace. He could have avoided the whole thing just by asking.

They didn’t have to fire him for blogging about controversial whatevers somewhere else - they had to fire him for totally disregarding the rules he agreed to follow in working there. Everything else - whether what he was saying was controversial, whether anyone knew who he was, whether there are gray areas in totally unrelated websites like MySpace, what effect this or that could have - is just smokescreen.

By: Jason

Jason — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 23:35:05 +0000

I guess, where does it stop? If it’s OK to blog about political issues (on your own time), is it OK to volunteer for campaigns? Contribute? Put up a bumper sticker or sign in your cubicle at work?

When you go into Journalism you decide that pursuing the truth and sharing what you learn is more important than sharing your opinions via the internet.

Blog away. But steer clear of political opinion. It’s not that hard to do. The world doesn’t need a senior producer blogging about Hillary. The world maybe did need this guy as a working journalist.

By: Safran

Safran — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:28:49 +0000

Company rules are company rules. If CNN requires you to get permission before blogging, you get permission. You’re not employed by the First Amendment - you’re employed by AOL/TW.

I’m with Aidian - and probably most of you - on this. It’s bad policy. But you choose your employer.

I bet, before long, blogging becomes mandatory at CNN. The strangest part is that the producers are the ones who should be blogging first.

By: Aidian

Aidian — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 16:36:16 +0000

Did he post from the newsroom while on the clock using a company computer? Was he paid by the Huffington Post in violation of a personal services contract with CNN? Failing that, I don’t see how it’s any of his employers business. I’ll bet CNN’s legally solid, but the company’s straight wrong about this.

He has a right to his opinions; he has a right to express them, and it’s not just wrong but unpatriotic of Time Warner to argue that it has a right to mute his expression.

A quick search at the Center For Responsive Politics website (opensercets.org) shows Time Warner employees have given $69,663 to presidential candidates this election cycle. Among those donors are the CEO, CFO, etc. Pazienza was a (senior) grunt, and all he did was express his personal political views.

Journalistically, In a “Big J” sense, we’re supposed to enable democracy. That’s not served by discouraging it in the trenches. I wish more of the people I’ve known in TV news actually KNEW enough about politics to get fired for blogging about them

One last thing — opensecrets.org shows three ‘08 presidential donors that listed CNN as their employer. A producer and the chief PR hack gave to Obama; the largest donations were from an engineer who gave $1250 to Ron Paul.

I know it’s a skewed sample, but every Ron Paul supporter I’ve met was a technical person in television. Something in the coffee over in engineering I think.

By: Tim

Tim — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 15:18:47 +0000

Hmmm ask yourselves - what if someone else had registered on the Huffington Post with the name Chez Pazienza (unlikely as it is, duplicate names do exist in the world)? Who would know whether it was the CNN producer, or not?

He has a right to post his opinions in his personal life; and as long as he doesn’t claim they are CNN’s opinions, but his own, it should be OK.

In my opinion there’s either more to this than is being said, or this is CNN’s lawyers worrying that someone will sue the network over the personal opinion of the employee.

By: P. Lee

P. Lee — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:23:42 +0000

He can write whatever he wants…Just as long as he is now an ex-CNN producer. I can see it on Drudge already, “Commie CNN Wants Barak to Choke the Bitch” with a four-alarm sirens.

By: alex

alex — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:47:20 +0000

aside from actually taking political views on various subjects that may contradict the companys’ political endorsements…. news media websites (and tv programs) use “blogging” as a business tool to draw in pageviews and generate advertising…a service to offer consumers to have dynamic correspondences with professionals in the industry. there is a certain conflict of interest, not necessarily because of content, but because he’s stealing business.

By: tdc

tdc — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:09:24 +0000

and this ‘neutrality’ of the media allowed larry craig to do the nasty, get busted, booked, plead out and out of town before anyone in the media knew who the heck he was?

get outta town

By: Tom Planchet

Tom Planchet — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:00:05 +0000

Unfortunately, yes, I think CNN had the right, if not the obligation to terminate him. If he had been publicly ‘outed’ in some way, his blasting of Bush would only have legitimized the ‘liberal media’ bias claims. Yet, even if that weren’t the case, you can’t make your private views widely public or the public will sense and seek out what they see as a lack of neutrality in your reporting.

By: tdc

tdc — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:36:42 +0000

i guess it’s better than waterboarding him.

you guys in the biz here really need to get over yourselves.

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:18:42 +0000

I love how the media rip a politician or celebrity for some controversial belief that they may have uttered in private (or public) but then a producer whines and complains when they’re fired for saying much “worse” on a public blog. Welcome to the club!

We all have a right to free speech but we also have to take responsibility for what we say. Also, you don’t have a “right” to a job. It’s essentially a contract between you and an employer and either parties can terminate it at any time. Fair is fair.

By: Mich

Mich — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:11:17 +0000

I’m a little tired of folks using free speech as an excuse. “Personal” doesn’t mean free to post whatever you like. His blog is controversial.

For example, when we’re in the middle of an election, and you’ve got a title to a post on your blog that reads, “Is Barack Obama gonna have to choke a bitch?” — I’d say that’s inappropriate, even it were just a clever play on words. But especially because you work for CNN. The public may not know that but your co-workers do. They see your big pretty picture. That’s enough.

I don’t think the situation was handled properly. I think he should’ve had an opportunity to engage in an honest discussion about his blog and the potential impact on his work. Chances are there were other factors in play here.

CNN’s statement that “employees must first get permission to write for a non-CNN outlet” is ridiculous. But so is his: “Does that mean I can’t post on a MySpace blog that my friends read?” If you’re a super-producer for CNN, what are you doing on MySpace anyway??? Is he 20? He seems to have an awful lot of free time to be posting away on his blog, MySpace and online to his wife. Maybe that’s why he was fired?

To me, this all smells like the newscaster that likes to party on the weekends and doesn’t “get” why he was fired for pity’s sake. You have a responsibility at all times to behave accordingly. Especially these days.

Sucks for him, Yes. But I think his resume is such that he’ll be fine. And maybe this is a blessing in disguise. Maybe his next job will allow a little more “freedom.”