Skip to comments.CNN: The Last Name In News
Posted on 11/29/2007 7:55:34 PM PST by neverdem
I only saw a little of the Republican presidential debate last night, which featured video questions sent in through YouTube selected by CNN. Theres a lot of griping this morning about how the debate was an embarrassment and a bad night for the GOP in general because CNN chose questions that were either defiantly peculiar, beneath contempt, or freakish. I wonder if theres a little oversensitivity at work here, because the great surprise of the first YouTube debate in September, featuring Democrats, was how substantive it was and how it forced the Democratic field to engage for the first time in discussing policy differences. That was even true about the question from the man dressed in the snowman costume.
What is notable, however, is what a hash CNN is making in this long election season of its self-described reputation as the first name in news. In two successive debates now, CNN has made editorial decisions that range from the bizarre to the scandalous. The bizarre conduct came in the Democratic debate in Nevada two weeks ago, which concluded with a bubbly young woman asking a vapid question about whether Hillary Clinton preferred diamonds or pearls. When that young woman came under withering assault for wasting time with something so stupid, she said she had wanted to ask about nuclear-waste removal but that a CNN producer had pushed her to come up with something lighter.
Think about that the next time someone tells you that CNN is preferable to the Fox News Channel because it is more serious. (Yes, for the record, I am a Fox News Channel contributor, but in this context, even MSNBC is positively Ciceronian compared to CNN.)
The scandalous aspect last night is that three Democratic operatives were allowed to pose as unaffiliated voters asking questions specifically designed to embarrass the entire Republican party, not just the candidates on stage. Given the fact that it took bloggers all of 12 seconds to figure this out, one has to ask how on earth CNN producers didnt think to do the elementary spade work of simply Googling the names of the questioners to ensure they met the unaffiliated voter standard CNN and YouTube had set out.
Its easy to see why CNNs producers liked their questions. Its because those questions echoed the partisan prejudices of CNN producers. This sort of liberal media bias would have been far less of an issue if we were talking about a debate between the Democratic and Republican nominees for president, because in those circumstances both candidates are seeking to govern all Americans, even those who dont vote for them. But in a Republican primary debate, when it is GOP members who are trying to determine which candidate should best represent their party, an overwhelmingly Democratic institution like CNN needs to be specially conscious of the way its biases might play into question selection. If CNN had been conscious about this, and had therefore been prudent about checking out the identities and preferences of the video questioners it had selected, it would have avoided plunging itself into a days-long spiral of embarrassment about the networks lack of professionalism, absence of care, and spiraling unseriousness.
CNN, the Mosr Busted Name in News.
The republicans aren't mentioning that CNN broke its own debate rules by giving the guy a microphone in the audience, and allowing him to attack all of the republicans as a group, AFTER they answered his question. This outrageous behavior by CNN, combined with the guy being a Hilary supporter, clinches the issue.
Seesh, should read-
CNN, the Most Busted Name in News.
Can Podhoretz really be dumb enough to think that CNN didn’t know exactly who these people were? It HAD to be deliberate cheating in both debates. ALL of the questioners were bogus.
CNN has so many plants, it should be renamed “The Botany Channel”.
The gay general was really a California National Guard retired colonel.
Another great job by Anderson Pooper of CNN!!!!
Discussion of “Clinton News Network” followup. Now you know why I ignore the airport monitors broadcasting their drivel to the sheeple.
Yes I agree entirely, that is part of the scandal, I’m just saying that when CNN gave him a mic and a special platform from the audience which no one else had, that magnifies the scandal.
Why couldn’t a candidate have the cajones to tell that rambling gay retired general “OK, you did all these great things in the military for 40 years, so then how did it matter that you couldnt run around telling everyone you were a homosexual?” It is an army, not a dating service.
I had that same thought myself,why didn’t he come out sooner also Fox news is reporting that CNN paid his air fare to this debate.
Does anyone have an e-mail address foe Anderson Cooper?
One issue that has flown under the radar is that youtube posts terrorist videos and propaganda.
Very well put! I'm trying to see how "don't ask don't tell" made any difference at all in this guys career.
They are far from prudent and probably couldn't care less about whether they "embarrass themselves" or not. The liberals at CNN apparently enjoy flaunting their bias. I'm sure they don't see it as a "lack of professionalism", but as a bold statement (like the X over our VP). I'll bet the only ones talking about it will be preaching to the choir, anyway. (talk-radio and conservative websites).
CNN - They really are the Clinton News Network.
That being said, I felt the "questions" were answered very well despite the actual intention of CNN. (Yes, I know - I'm preaching to the choir.)
Here is a link to the CLIFF NOTES of the DEMOCRATIC DEBATE.
Really worth watching.
Cover your keyboard or put down your drink first.
Thanks for the link.