Skip to comments.CNN Tries to Blunt Romney Criticism Over Candy (managing editor email)
Posted on 10/17/2012 5:23:14 PM PDT by RummyChick
CNN's Managing Editor sent an email around the office today, praising Candy Crowley and trying to blunt criticism that she was unfair to Mitt Romney.
The email -- sent by Mark Whitaker and obtained by TMZ -- is almost a series of talking points to address Candy's critics.
Here's the full email:
"Let's start with a big round of applause for Candy Crowley for a superb job under the most difficult circumstances imaginable. She and her team had to select and sequence questions in a matter of hours, and then she had to deal with the tricky format, the nervous questioners, the aggressive debaters, all while shutting out the pre-debate attempts to spin and intimidate her. She pulled it off masterfully.
The reviews on Candy's performance have been overwhelmingly positive but Romney supporters are going after her on two points, no doubt because their man did not have as good a night as he had in Denver. On the legitimacy of Candy fact-checking Romney on Obama's Rose Garden statement, it should be stressed that she was just stating a point of fact: Obama did talk about an act (or acts) of terror, no matter what you think he meant by that at the time. On why Obama got more time to speak, it should be noted that Candy and her commission producers tried to keep it even but that Obama went on longer largely because he speaks more slowly. We're going to do a word count to see whether, as in Denver, Romney actually got more words in even if he talked for a shorter period of time."
TMZ broke the story ... some honchos at CNN want the criticism to go away, even though it's shining a light on one of their most high-profile personalities -- and you just can't buy this type of publicity.
Read more: http://www.tmz.com#ixzz29baPORBb
She’s simply another of N libo-bimbos.
Where N is almost an uncountably large number.
Are they going to count “uh” in their word count?
The media is lying about Obama lying about his lying.
Pretty thin skinned in the face of real, fact-based criticism if they have to stoop to counting the words spoken by each person!
And the everlasting question that makes all of us beat our head against the nearest wall: “Why do the Republican candidates always agree to debates with liberal MSM moderators? Why?”
Candy left a sour aftertaste on the American people.
Well that would work except for the fact that we all saw Candy being unfair to Mitt.
Sombody needs to let CNN’s briliant managing editor, Matt, know that when you watch TV you actually might notice what you are watching.
Yes. ‘Are you going to believe what I am telling you or are you going to believe your lying eyes and ears?’
CNN has a multi-million dollar appeal languishing in Obamas stacked NLRB (NLRB Case 05-CA-031828).
the administrative-law judge (an Obama donor) already ruled against CNN in 2009 .
Their appeal has since set before the 4 member NLRB board: 3 of them Obama appointees.
Of course Managing Editors don’t talk about these matters...
Each "uuuhh" counts as its own word.
That's what biased failing newspapers have - prizes to replace the trust and respect of their readers that they used to compete for...now, it's 'prizes'. I don't believe anyone has ever received a Pulitzer for reporting on something that backs a conservative idea... so think of it as a prize for liberals.
Cable networks like CNN and MSNBC could do the same - award prizes to people like themselves - and like Candy - people known for being biased against Republicans. But not just biased - biased while telling the world they're objective. Authentic people don't qualify.
Anyhow CNN could hand out prizes until the 2,000 liberal elites in the country are their only audience.
Go for it CNN - if you believe Candy was fair, you're ready for the 'prize' scam...
Actually its good that any sane American gets to witness this. I’ve been following the comments on Yahoo News for the last few weeks. Its been about a 3-1 advantage for Romney at least.
I’m voting for Candy of the CNN Party!!! She was so Smart and presidential! Candy is dandy! Goooooo Candy!!! :)
Did you know Tiny Tim made some very favorable comments about Jesus? I doubt the new age TM pacticing Crowing Candy would do the same.
Whitaker is as sleasy as Crowley. last night in trying to explain herself after the debate she conveniently mosquoted Obama as having referenced “These acts of terror...”, and now Whitacker tries to pretend that Obama’s claim at the debate was simply that he had referenced “an act or acts of terror”, rather than so identifying Benghazi.
Yes. And you are right.
Every time I hear Candy Crowley mentioned I immediately think of Miss Piggy or a predatory fat porn star.
She failed in the most fundamental job of time-keeping.
A word count !?!?! Are they going to count all the Umm's and Ahh's as words.
One of the peeps in the Frank Luntz focus group said it best "If you ask Obama the time of day you would get 'Partly cloudy with a 30% chance of rain"
Since when does an “impartial”, “professional”, “reporter” leap to anyone’s defense “instinctively”?
Wonder if CNN will replay that little bit of “telling truth to power”?