CNN’s Irresponsible Debate Coverage Undermines Its Claim As The ‘Most Trusted Name In News’
CNN’s Irresponsible Debate Coverage Undermines Its Claim As The ‘Most Trusted Name In News’
CNN bills itself as the “Most Trusted Name in News.” It has already hosted five presidential debates in the 2008 primary season, with another four scheduled.
While many in the media credited the network with bringing “originality and spontaneity” to the debate process by partnering with YouTube, its debates have more often been characterized by sloppy preparation, a lack of transparency, and theatrics that undermine the intelligence of the American public. Some lowlights:
– CNN planted a softball question with an audience member. During the recent Democratic debate, CNN stopped UNLV student Maria Luisa from asking a question about Yucca Mountain, instead telling her to ask Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY): “Do you prefer diamonds or pearls?”
– CNN failed to disclose a questioner’s support for Clinton. Last night, CNN failed to disclose during the debate that ret. Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr, who asked about gays and lesbians serving in the military, is actually a co-chair of “Veterans and Military Retirees for Hillary Committee” and a steering member of “LGBT Americans for Hillary.”
– CNN failed to disclose Carville’s ties to the Clinton campaign. In its post-debate roundtable after the Democratic debate earlier this month, CNN featured commentator James Carville. Yet CNN failed to disclose up front that Carville has raised money for Clinton.
– CNN gave airtime to a question from a right-wing activist. CNN and YouTube billed last night’s GOP debate as one in which “YOU ask the questions of the candidates through videos you submit on YouTube.” The network rejected a question by Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R), arguing that he “has regular access to politicians.” Instead, one of the 34 videos it chose (out of 5,000 submissions) was from right-wing Washington insider Grover Norquist.
– CNN claimed American public can’t be trusted to choose questions. CNN senior vice president David Bohrman claimed that if allowed, the public would likely choose questions about “whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg” or UFOs. He failed to remember that at the Oct. 31 Democratic debate, moderator Tim Russert also asked Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) about whether he had ever seen a UFO.
– CNN took sponsorship funding from the “clean coal” industry. The coal industry sponsored both last night’s Republican debate in Florida and the Democratic one in Nevada earlier this month. The sponsorships appeared to be aimed at pressuring anti-coal lawmakers in the states. In both debates, no questions were asked about climate change or the negative impact of the coal industry.
– CNN’s post-debate analysis focused on the trivial, inconsequential. After July’s Democratic YouTube debate, CNN ran a segment critiquing the candidates on their body language and dress. Wolf Blitzer: “Candidates also sighed, they rolled their eyes, they looked at their watches during the debate.” CNN’s Carol Costello commented, “Look at how the candidates were dressed. The men wore dark suits, but Hillary Clinton wore a brightly-colored jacket.”
Following CNN’s Democratic debate two weeks ago, the New York Observer’s Steve Kornacki even went so far as to suggest that CNN, once the “gold standard for all-news television,” should “never again be entrusted with a presidential debate.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
58 Responses to “CNN’s Irresponsible Debate Coverage Undermines Its Claim As The ‘Most Trusted Name In News’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
CNN has been in a free fall for years.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:30 pmComment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:29 pm
Isn’t it past time for you to shut up?
November 29th, 2007 at 5:31 pmComment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:29 pm
Are you going to post a bunch of innuendo and lies then walk away, just like you do with every thread you visit?
November 29th, 2007 at 5:32 pmWhat a bunch of F-ups.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:33 pmComment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:29 pm
The truth does have a liberal bias, but then again - the truth is the truth. It upsets you that progressives are able to shine the light on themselves, only because it gives validity to reporting on conservatives. If only the Nation, the Washington Post, Time Magazine, et al. behaved in the same manner, we might be safer and freer.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:35 pmComment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:29 pm
I am SICK of trolls. They should be outlawed.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:36 pmNamtilaku:
I hope you’re referring to the Nation (USA) not The Nation (the mag).
November 29th, 2007 at 5:38 pmCNN, NBC, et al give way too much time to top tier (read the chosen few) and completly dis the folks with ideas.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:39 pmYeah, silly me, actually meant the National Review. Screwed that one up big, my apologies to The Nation.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:40 pmFourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism
#6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:42 pmComment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
Do you see your fingers punching keys? That’s where.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:44 pmLet me preface this by saying that I really enjoy this website and find it very informative.
That being said, TP you guys censor speakers on your site DAILY!!! Why do you hold other organizations to a standard that you don’t apply to yourself. I understand you have discretion, does CNN not?
I agree with your points here, mostly. But you come off sounding hypocritical.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:47 pmNo, I’m here. Where did I share “a bunch of innuendo and lies�
Comment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
On the Iraq thread below. Go read your own posts to refresh you memory, then read the rest of the posts to see the beating you took for it.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:49 pmAn odd statement when you consider that the half dozen of so liberal plants during CNN’s debate last night decalred that they were undecided Republicans.
Comment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
Proof?
November 29th, 2007 at 5:50 pma debate for presnit2 sponsored by the coal industry. what more do you need to know?
November 29th, 2007 at 5:50 pmComment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
I smell the stench of a Republican political operative.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:56 pmComment by Manslagt — November 29, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
By the way, liar, I am still waiting for proof that half a dozen people identified themselves as unidentified Republicans, are liberal, and were planted at the debate. You must have a transcript laying around somewhere there at GOP headquarters, so it should be easy. So let’s see it.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:02 pmahhhh…didn’t watch that stupid debate and NEVER watch Censored New Network…..bloodpressure is fine.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:03 pmThe Center for American Progress, which operates ThinkProgress, is part of Clinton Inc. And therefore the troll is warning TP about who it is? That it should remember its nefarious plans and not run around being fair?
November 29th, 2007 at 6:06 pmIt’s an overused line, but I really did think I was reading satire.
There were no WMDs in Iraq. Period. Anyone who tries to argue to the contrary has ZERO credibility. That means you, Manslagt.
Oh, I forgot. Clinton did it. Right?
November 29th, 2007 at 6:06 pmCapn Manastic: Fantastic catch! TP - hats off for a good thread and the outing of what the reichwingnuts like to characterize as a “liberal channel”. CNN has been an enigma of late with the mixture of characters like Wolf Blitzer and Jack Caffrey (good cop/bad cop) and then Lou Dobbs (on some issues good cop/on other issues bad cop) so I’ve concluded that CNN isn’t any different at all than the other sycophantic Bush megaphones out there calling themselve the “mainstream media”. The ONLY difference is that CNN is more covert about it’s intentions - attempting to confuse the viewer by the diametric opposite personalities and politics on the same show.
Somehow yesterday the television in the background went to the Bill Press Radio Show which was a total hoot! Anyone else catch it? Is Bill Press part of the Center for American Progress and thus part of TP?? I’m getting confused.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:10 pmOnce I started getting news from various sources on the internet and they decided to follow the info-tainment, purely for-profit model of Fox, watching CNN has become downright painful to watch. Mostly for the things they exclude… It really is almost physically sickening.
CNN
Corporate Nausea Network
November 29th, 2007 at 6:10 pmThen you have the obvious Repturds hosting the morning show on CNN - John Roberts has such a tight sphincter muscle that he can crack a walnut between his cheeks :). Then there’s the chick from CNN who thought she was intelligent to hurl questions during the last dem debate but turned out to be just another Republiscum airhead. Can’t think of her name.
Verbalkint: This village idiot troll in particular (remember Mr. Pee blaming clinton consistently?) need post just one sentence: CLINTON DID IT! and be done with it. No one dialogues with him so he’s wasting his time.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:13 pmoldtree: It could be preznit2 or prezditz2.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:15 pmNew York Observer’s Steve Kornacki even went so far as to suggest that CNN, once the “gold standard for all-news television,†should “never again be entrusted with a presidential debate.â€
I think I agree with that statement. The debate was ridiculous last night. CNN was awful last month in Nevada and it was awful last night. Of course, anything positive to come from that motley group on the stage would have been a monumental task…and CNN wasn’t up to it.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:18 pmSo far, based upon the questions posed to all the candidates, it would seem no one in this country gives a flying fig about the fact that the Constitution of the United States of America has been illegally overridden by the existing administration; and by congress enacting all kinds of laws that the Constitution specifically forbids. It’s not like a candidate or two hasn’t made restoring the Constitution a part of their campaign (see Chrid Dodd, for example). It’s simply that the issue does not resonate with those who control the media; and not enough hell has been raised in opposition to the desecration of that document. In fact, complying with its provisions has become, in many people’s minds, an impediment to our “safety”.
Because of this - BE AFRAID,BE VERY AFRAID - not of what others can do to our country, but of what we are allowing our country to do to us.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:21 pmHi Marie! I used to watch and trust CNN - no more! They cleverly evade and omit in order to scramble people’s minds. I agree that they can’t handle the enormity of the debate arena and Anderson lost total control of it last night from the outset; in fact, when Ghouliani and Romney began to have a “catfight” in the first couple of minutes, I felt so embarrassed for everyone. Did you catch the looks on the faces of the other candidates along the way?
Ghouliani’s mafioso roots began to show last night as he attempted to scratch Mitt’s eyes out and dredge up personal stuff on him. Rudy had better be careful what he asks for because Rudy’s personal life is more like a travesty or train wreck then that of someone vying for the highest office in the country. Rudy’s personal life will be the destruction of any political aspirations he’ll ever have, coupled with his botching of 911, and I’d say that he’ll soon be out of the running. Bernie Kerik’s singing and Judith Regan may be spilling her guts. What she knows will tank Rudy Giuliani - as if he needs any more corruption added to the heap that’s mounting.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:23 pmOver at the conservative Weekly Standard, there is despair and consternation at the picture of the Republican Party presented at last night’s CNN/YouTube debate. While one column feared the “vaguely threatening parade” of the assembled GOP White House hopefuls, editor and Fox News commentator Fred Barnes lamented a debate that was “mortifying to the candidates.” Apparently, the truth is not setting them free. Because the Party of Hate Americans saw on stage last night wasn’t a caricature, but the reality of what the GOP has become.
For the details, see:
November 29th, 2007 at 6:24 pm“The Weekly Standard Laments the Party of Hate Debate.”
How about CNN’s use of highly partisan Dan “Baghdad Bob” Senor’s wife?
November 29th, 2007 at 6:25 pmJust like the outing of Valerie Plame - it’s right out of the Don’s Handbook: If you can’t get the man, go for the kids or the wife. If you can’t win the candidacy legitimately, go for the personal stuff. Ghouliani is downright scary! He looked like a cross between a sexually repressed school marm escoriating her students for outing her and a bald bag lady, for goodness sakes. Ewwww…
November 29th, 2007 at 6:26 pmThe only real question that needed to be asked last night was, “Do you think America can be convinced that Republicans are the correct people to fix this Republican mess Bush and the neocons have made for America and the world?”
November 29th, 2007 at 6:26 pmIt was fun watching “Mr. Virtues” Bill Bennett deliver another ethics lecture in the CNN post-talking point “debate.” He even dropped a gambling term, “All in.”
All I can say is that Judith Nathan must definitely have a “father figure complex” - big time!
November 29th, 2007 at 6:27 pmI’ve beat this horse before but:
1. I think that allowing ANY network to host exclusive “debates” is disturbing. They should be carried, like the olden days, on every network.
2. The “debates” aren’t debates. A real debate allows each candidate to answer each question and/or offer a rebuttal. What we are witnessing now are “leading questions” and “gotchas”. Neither have a place in honest political discourse.
(NOTE: I realize that we don’t have “honest political discourse” but, one can hope.)
November 29th, 2007 at 6:27 pmLet CSPAN conduct the debates.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:37 pmAlot of the CNN subject matter has been going the way of sort of a FOX LITE kinda way. Minor local news events, bank robbery, missing kids, wounded puppies, etc. You seldom see any real reporting anymore, and that goes for all the network news programs and stations.
Corporate Sellouts.
Buck Fush
November 29th, 2007 at 6:39 pmCorporate Fascist Sellouts!
November 29th, 2007 at 6:44 pmJust wait till’ Mount Vesuvius Edmunds spills her guts!
November 29th, 2007 at 6:45 pmComment by pete — November 29, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
Well said, Pete. Right on both counts.
Allowing a single network to carry a debate exclusively turns the debate into a programming decision, not an informational exercise.
And these are not debates. They’re just mass photo-ops that the networks hope will turn into food fights so they can get a bunch of hits on Youtube the next day.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:50 pmHillbilly, please — get some help. Or some education. You’re babbling again.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:51 pmHillbilly, please — get some help. Or some education. You’re babbling again.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — November 29, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Not again. Still.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:54 pmMost Trusted Name In News is the marketing department’s circle jerk. Nobody actually called them that, ever.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:58 pmCorrection noted, Lefty Patriot. Thanks.
November 29th, 2007 at 7:07 pmahhhh…didn’t watch that stupid debate and NEVER watch Censored New Network…..bloodpressure is fine.
Comment by wisedup — November 29, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
well you didn’t miss much - one of the questions,as far as i can remember,was “what would jesus think about the death penalty?” - f**king woeful CNN.
November 29th, 2007 at 7:14 pmLet’s face it: American news is nothing but trivial.
November 29th, 2007 at 7:50 pmHuckabee talked about how the Bible is at times allegorical. He used as an example about plucking one’s eyes out. I tell you, after watching that horrible display of a “debate”, I seriously considered doing it anyway.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:00 pmI tell you, after watching that horrible display of a “debateâ€, I seriously considered doing it anyway.
Comment by tomazulob — November 29, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
I wanted to pluck HIS eyes out.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:02 pmCNN senior vice president David Bohrman claimed that if allowed, the public would likely choose questions about “whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg†or UFOs. He failed to remember that at the Oct. 31 Democratic debate, moderator Tim Russert also asked Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) about whether he had ever seen a UFO.
***********************************************
Given the evidence for the level of utter contempt which CNN quite clearly has for its viewing audience, it’s my opinion that anyone who voluntarily continues to patronize them is indeed an idiot.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:34 pmCNN’s Irresponsible Debate Coverage Undermines Its Claim As The ‘Most Trusted Name In News’
I wouldn’t have expected anything else.
It’s basically just fox . . . with glamor.
Try not watching television at all for 3 or 4 months and then turn it on
November 29th, 2007 at 10:55 pmfor a few minutes. You’ll wonder why you ever bothered with it in the
first place.
Finally, someone (TP) mentioned Grover Norquist’s cameo and fake question. Talk about plants! I thought the whole point of YouTube questions was to give us nobodies a shot at puting a question to the candidates that might have gone un-asked by MSM. Shame on CNN for making it a venue for a highly placed, neo-con operative who has all the access he needs to those people. A moment of pure propaganda that slid right past those who don’t know the name.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:34 pmWhy would anyone waste time watching these things other than for entertainment?. To call them debates is a joke.
CNN and the rest of MSM has long lost credibility, they are all government propaganda stations. Sometimes I wonder if Northcoms psyops division isn’t providing these guys with their content.
Even some of the left leaning blogs are being corrupted by donations from the tax free foundations, and others with deep pockets, etc. who seek to influence content with the power of money. Some more than others.
Fortunately I live overseas and only have to endure it when I go back once a year to visit. The 3 weeks spent in the states in October w/o internet access- my notebook crashed, had me in an almost catatonic state. Attempts at keeping informed by watching the news on TV was simply mind numbing. The newspapers were not much better.
I come back to find out the House passed the Homeland Terrorist Prevention Act of 2007 by a vote of 400 to 6 and I had no idea even though the TV was working fine and I read the NY Times almost every day (maybe I missed it). In fact, seems even the left leaning blogs didn’t pick it up until almost 3 weeks after it passed. Must be those foundations at work again.
I am sure Hillary and Obama will not be able to vote again when it comes up for the vote in the Senate. If they can’t provide leadership as a Senator, why should anyone believe these guys/gals will provide leadership as President.
November 30th, 2007 at 2:42 amDoes anyone still trust CNN????!!!!!
November 30th, 2007 at 3:18 amHa, ha, ha, ha, ha!
CNN, the Glen Beck channel, “the most trusted name in news”.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
I haven’t had such a good laugh in weeks!
November 30th, 2007 at 4:28 amCNN…the mistrusted name in news.
November 30th, 2007 at 6:09 amAs a CNN viewer since 1982, I terminated my cable TV subscription about 3 months ago. I don’t even watch broadcast news anymore. Television news is bad for your head. Stay away from it.
November 30th, 2007 at 6:47 amDoes TP really think it was inappropriate for the General to ask his question last night? Do you believe Republicans or Democrats would (if elected) would be president of ONLY their party, or would they be everyone’s president?
It’s wrong for candidates to take questions from anyone but loyal followers?
Ridiculous!
November 30th, 2007 at 10:31 amKeith Kerr is also a member of the Log Cabin Republicans…interesting choice for Sen. Clinton.
December 1st, 2007 at 12:19 pmWant to see a very comprehensive archive of debate footage that includes all the candidates?
I’ve been creating this new page, check it out:
http://debates.redlasso.com/dbt/
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:20 pmi still trust CNN over FOX. WOW! does that make me biased??
December 11th, 2007 at 3:35 pm