“It is not clear, however, that Nasr’s Tweet violated CNN’s social media policy.

A CNN spokesperson told us that the network has had a specific social media policy in place since November 2009, which was announced in a staff memo at the time. He declined to provide details on the policy or comment on whether Nasr had violated it. (The official line for Nasr’s termination is that her tweet “did not meet CNN’s editorial standards” and that her “credibility … has been compromised.”)

Meanwhile, we suspect Nasr was fired because the sentiment she expressed in the Tweet was grossly offensive to many of CNN’s constituents. In other words, the termination has nothing to do with social media, editorial standards, or, for that matter, credibility. It’s too bad the network can’t just say that.”

http://gawker.com/5583203/cnn-execs-wont-admit-why-they-really-fired-octavia-nasr

Thanks for this thoughtful post. I should note add that we are quite comfortable linking to sites that do not follow our standards. For instance, I blogged recently that I thought the Washington Post is too lax in using unnamed sources: http://bit.ly/9JMGHr and http://bit.ly/cXDH2U

But we will still link to the Washington Post.