Sicko in the media
CNN's Sanjay Gupta is an ass.
In my books, you don't accuse someone of 'fudging the facts' on national television without having clear factual basis yourself.
What is worse, is that Gupta then tells Moore "Hey, I agree with your conclusions, so why are you fussing that I've called you a liar? Aren't you overreacting?"
Such a stance is bad enough in an opinion piece, but it's worse from a correspondent who claims to be dispensing objective news. It's utterly shameful, and reflects badly on both Gupta as a correspondent, and on CNN.
This essentially constitutes a common cognitive bias called the 'Halo effect'; once you've decided that someone's a fact-fudger, it's easy to repeatedly decide that they're fudging facts every time you have a doubt.
There's a place for this kind of thinking. If someone has lied to and hurt you repeatedly, it doesn't necessarily make sense to obsess over careful assessment of everything they say.
But basic professional ethics demand that public pronouncements made by health correspondents for major news networks should be based on evidence rather than on biased emotion.
In my books, you don't accuse someone of 'fudging the facts' on national television without having clear factual basis yourself.
What is worse, is that Gupta then tells Moore "Hey, I agree with your conclusions, so why are you fussing that I've called you a liar? Aren't you overreacting?"
Such a stance is bad enough in an opinion piece, but it's worse from a correspondent who claims to be dispensing objective news. It's utterly shameful, and reflects badly on both Gupta as a correspondent, and on CNN.
This essentially constitutes a common cognitive bias called the 'Halo effect'; once you've decided that someone's a fact-fudger, it's easy to repeatedly decide that they're fudging facts every time you have a doubt.
There's a place for this kind of thinking. If someone has lied to and hurt you repeatedly, it doesn't necessarily make sense to obsess over careful assessment of everything they say.
But basic professional ethics demand that public pronouncements made by health correspondents for major news networks should be based on evidence rather than on biased emotion.