CNN

Colin Powell Gets It (almost) Right

Posted by on January 24, 2011 at 12:56 pm. 2 Comments :

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday and addressed the “nastiness” in our public dialogue:

“There has crept in our society and our public dialogue, a coarseness, a nastiness, an attack of people who don’t share the same views as you do,” he said. “All sorts of nastiness. And it is not just politicians who are doing this to each other, and, frankly, politics has always been a contact sport in this country, but with all of the cable channels and talk radio and blogs, especially blogs, where people can be anonymous with their nastiness, I think has caused a level of coarseness in our society that we’ve all got to think about.”

Especially blogs? That was a gratuitous dig that doesn’t really advance the point he was making. Blogs don’t have nearly the influence that politicians and national television and radio commentators have. Their contribution to the coarseness in public dialogue is tiny by comparison.

I’m glad to hear that Powell agrees that violent rhetoric directed toward political adversaries has escalated beyond reason and can result in potential harm, but did he really have to shift the responsibility from the media to anonymous commenters on blogs? That just diminishes the message and lets characters with millions of followers, like Glenn “Shoot them in the head” Beck, and Rush “Don’t kill all the liberals” Limbaugh, off the hook.

CNN’s Tea Party Partner’s Corruption Deepens

Posted by on January 15, 2011 at 11:11 am. 3 Comments :

CNN Tea PartyLast month CNN announced that they had entered into a partnership with Tea Party Express, an activist organization and political action committee, to co-host a Republican presidential primary debate. It is an unprecedented relationship that joins the news network with a discredited enterprise who’s reputation is sullied by racism, scandal, and fraud.

This week there is news that confirms the poor judgment of CNN to become involved with Tea Party Express.

First, the Center for Responsive Politics discovered that Tea Party Express has received thousands of dollars in donations from a woman who has been dead for four years.

“Joan Holmes is the late wife of media entrepreneur Lee Holmes, who himself has in recent years ranked among the most prolific political donors in Guam, a U.S. territory in the Pacific Ocean. And Lee Holmes was one of the first donors to the upstart Our Country Deserves Better PAC, which played a prominent role in electing conservative Republicans during the 2010 election cycle.”

And when Tea Party Express isn’t raising funds from the dead, they are raising funds by exploiting the dead. Last week they distributed a fundraising letter that drew on the sympathy of donors for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the other victims of the Tucson slaughter. The letter cast the Tea Party as the victim and politicized the tragedy by asserting that the shooter was “a far Left anarchist.”

“This weekend we all were horrified to hear the news of the violent shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and several others in Arizona. One thing that surprised us was how many in the news media and liberal political figures and organizations immediately launched into an attack on the tea party movement. […] We ask you to please stand with the Tea Party Express and show your support for our efforts. You can make a contribution online right now to the Tea Party Express – CLICK HERE TO CONTRIBUTE.”

This is the character of the group that CNN has seen fit to make their partner in hosting a GOP debate. It is an appalling relationship and ought to be regarded as an embarrassment for an ostensibly respectable news network. And it’s an example of the conservative bias of a corporate media empire that would never consider partnering with a liberal group like MoveOn.org. But it is also not surprising for a network whose new president, Ken Jautz, is the man who gave Glenn Beck his first job on TV.

Everyone who who cares about ethical media and fair elections should let CNN know that this is inappropriate and unprofessional. You can use this form on CNN’s web site to tell them that they should not be partnering with Tea Party Express or any right-wing wing PAC (or left-wing for that matter). You can also Tweet them at http://twitter.com/cnn. Use the hashtag #NoCNNTP.

WTF? CNN And Tea Party Express Partner For GOP Debate [Updated]

Posted by on December 19, 2010 at 10:55 am. 8 Comments :

CNN Tea PartyDec 17,2010 – CNN, the once dominant and comparatively respectable cable news network, seems determined to destroy whatever shreds are left of its credibility. They announced this morning that they will be partnering with the Tea Party Express for a Republican primary debate in September of 2011.

Generally when a media organization chooses to co-host a primary campaign event they go with the party apparatus or a non-partisan group like the League of Women Voters. Tea Party Express (TPE) is hardly non-partisan. TPE is a political action committee that has actively engaged in campaigning on behalf of specific candidates. They supported Sharron Angle in Nevada, Christine O’Donnell in Delaware, and Joe Miller in Alaska (all lost). They have also been vocal proponents of Sarah Palin, who is a speculative candidate for president herself and thus a possible participant in the debate. They have taken positions for or against GOP candidates based on their adherence to Tea Party dogma and helped to defeat GOP incumbents. How can they be impartial in a Republican primary debate?

CNN’s statement announcing this partnership quoted Sam Feist, CNN Political Director and Vice President of Washington-based programming, saying that…

“The Tea Party movement is a fascinating, diverse, grassroots force that already has drastically changed the country’s political landscape.”

“Undecided voters turn to CNN to educate themselves during election cycles, so it is a natural fit for CNN to provide a platform for the diverse perspectives within the Republican Party, including those of the Tea Party”

That statement ought to outrage members of the Tea Party who insist that they are not affiliated with any other party. It is a statement that reduces their views to being merely “perspectives within the Republican Party.” While TPE may not object to that characterization, I suspect that many other Tea Partiers would.

What’s more, the predominantly white organization cannot seriously be portrayed as diverse or as a “grassroots force.” They were created by Sal Russo and his Republican PR firm, Russo Marsh, and their brief history is fraught with scandal. Rival Tea Party groups were harshly critical of them for directing nearly half of the money they raised from citizen supporters to Russo’s firm. Their former spokesman, Mark Williams, was forced to resign after publishing a racially offensive article on his web site. That was a particularly embarrassing episode as the Tea Party was battling persistent allegations of racism at the time.

[Update] On the day following CNN’s announcement Williams issued a press release praising CNN for its decision to embrace Tea Party Express. In the release he declared himself to have been vindicated and noted that the CNN relationship was evidence that charges of racism against the Tea Party were unfounded.

Williams: “That a respected international, serious news organization like CNN and even the potential presidential candidates recognize that the Tea Party is anything but racist simply thrills me.” […] I feel completely vindicated, this is an absolute vindication of both the Tea Party and Mark Williams.”

This is precisely what makes CNN’s move so reprehensible. TPE can and is using this connection to whitewash their dubious reputation. CNN has to know that they are permitting themselves to be used for the political benefit of an organization that doesn’t even have the respect of their Tea Party comrades. When Williams resigned last summer, TPE was booted from the National Tea Party Federation and have never been reinstated. So how are they representative of the so-called movement?

The Tea Party’s influence has long been overstated in the media. Poll after poll shows that they are an insignificant segment of the population and that their views are wildly out of touch with the American mainstream and even the Republican Party. But if CNN were still determined to partner with a Tea Party group they should at least endeavor to find one without the repugnant baggage of TPE (an admittedly difficult task).[End Update]

It is also notable that Tea Party Express had become a fixture on Fox News. Fox provided wall to wall coverage of the TPE bus tour with reporter Griff Jenkins riding along. Perhaps Fox would have been an even more natural fit for partnering with TPE than CNN. After all, TPE was created by a Republican PR firm and Fox is the communications arm of the Republican Party. If nothing else this underscores the transparent dishonesty of portraying the Tea Party as anything other than an affiliate of the Republican Party. How else can they justify playing an official role in the GOP primary debate?

But far worse is the damage this does to CNN, an already wounded critter. This is an unprecedented partnership between a news organization and an active political action committee that has already taken sides in the debate. Would CNN ever consider partnering with MoveOn.org for a Democratic debate? I think not. And prior to this news, I would have hoped not. Now I would suggest that MoveOn give CNN a call just to see how fair and balanced they are.

[Update] What might have have prompted CNN to make this unholy alliance with a discredited and over-hyped entity? Undoubtedly CNN’s new president Ken Jautz had something to do with it. Jautz, who took the reins at CNN in September, was previously in charge of their sister network HLN. It was there that he made history by giving Glenn Beck his first job in television. In hiring Beck he praised the radio shock-jock as being “cordial,” and “non-confrontational.” That should have been a warning sign that Jautz might not be a suitable choice to run a news network. Jautz has always been more interested in ratings than journalism, and the Tea Party deal imparts a disturbing vision of the direction he intends to take CNN.[End Update]

Earlier this year ABC News tried to hire smear artist Andrew Breitbart as an election analyst. The public outcry against it (and Breitbart’s own prickly personality) resulted in Breitbart getting thrown to the curb. That should serve as an example that we can have a positive influence on these sort of decisions. Everyone who who cares about ethical media and fair elections should let CNN know that this is inappropriate and unprofessional. You can use this form on CNN’s web site to tell them that they should not be partnering with Tea Party Express or any right-wing wing PAC (or left-wing for that matter). You can also Tweet them at http://twitter.com/cnn. Use the hashtag #NoCNNTP.

James O’Keefe Defends Being A Loathsome, Cretinous, Scumbag

Posted by on October 4, 2010 at 3:47 pm. 4 Comments :

Fox News James O'KeefeIt’s been five days since the Fox News pimp, James O’Keefe, was caught trying to “seduce” CNN reporter Abbie Boudreau. He has finally come out with a statement on the web site of his mentor, Andrew Breitbart. And, as would be expected, it is a thoroughly dishonest exercise in self-justification.

But before we get to O’Keefe’s comments, let’s take a look at what Breitbart had to say about him:

“From what I’ve read about this script, though not executed, it is patently gross and offensive.”

That’s the view of the man who supported O’Keefe through his equally offensive escapades as a pimp. Now Breitbart thinks O’Keef’e antics are gross. He even denied in a tweet that he was associated with O’Keefe. However, he still gave him a platform to publish his response. And in that response O’Keefe begins by acknowledging the low level of ethics he and his comrades have:

“If you were to roam through my personal emails there are many outrageous plans, some parts of which I may approve of in principal [sic] with an ‘I like it’ in an email thread. But I may well object to a host of things about the plan, though I like the objective.”

Taken at his word, O’Keefe is admitting that he liked the objective of the CNN Caper. But this is someone who can never be taken at his word. He is a compulsive liar whose word has no value. Here is how he soft-peddled his version of the the plot against Boudreau:

“She would have had to consent before being filmed and she was not going to be faux ‘seduced’ unless she wanted to be.”

That is utterly false. He never sought the consent of his previous video victims. Why should we accept his assertion that he was going to start seeking consent now? If he was going to seek her consent, then why did the plan call for hidden cameras at the scene? And what would make him think that she would ever grant such consent to be filmed on his boat? And can anyone even tell me what he means by suggesting that the faux seduction would not have occurred “unless she wanted” it? What an arrogant and disgusting remark.

He goes on to assert that he was repulsed by parts of the plan and had no intention of going through with it. He offers as proof of this the fact that none of the things that were described in the script actually took place. Of course, the reason they didn’t take place is because his plan was foiled in advance by an accomplice with integrity pangs. This would be like the failed shoe bomber insisting that he never intended to blow up the plane by saying, “See? The plane isn’t blown up.”

To offer as a defense his assertion, after the plot fell apart, that he didn’t really plan to do it, is laughably absurd. He still needs to explain why his accomplice, Izzy Santa, was in the house, right where the script called for her to be, and he was still on the boat, right where the script called for him to be, and right where Santa was supposed to direct Boudreau. The plot was obviously in effect when Santa decided to pull the plug and O’Keefe cannot credibly claim otherwise.

The fact that it took O’Keefe five days to come up with an excuse this lame tells us a lot about what an ignorant slob he is. And if any media outlet gives this twerp a passing mention for whatever BS he produces in the future they should lose their license to broadcast.

Did CNN Fire Rick Sanchez? Or Was It You Know Who?

Posted by on October 2, 2010 at 2:19 am. 15 Comments :

Memo to CNN news hacks: Don’t fuck with Jon Stewart.

I’m not saying there is any connection, but the last time a CNN anchor went toe-to-toe with Stewart he also found himself out of job. Today Tucker Carlson is an Internet peddler of borrowed stories and Rupert Murdoch’s fluffer on Fox News.

When Rick Sanchez agreed to be interviewed today to plug his new book he probably had not planned to end his career, it was just one of those things that happens. We’ve all been through it. He just got caught up in the excitement of spewing anti-Semitic stereotypes and thought he could one-up Mel Gibson. Here is what he said:

“Everybody that runs CNN is a lot like [Jon] Stewart. And a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart. And to imply that somehow they – the people in this country who are Jewish – are an oppressed minority? Yeah.”

So Sanchez thinks that Jews are not victims of discrimination, and they are in control of the media. And he feels perfectly at ease expressing that opinion aloud. That is certainly justification for terminating a network anchor, but I am somewhat skeptical that that’s how it happened.

Generally it takes some period of time for a gaffe like this to build up a head of steam and accumulate some outrage from offended parties. But Sanchez got the boot before most of America even knew he had screwed up. What’s more, CNN has a new chief, Ken Jautz, who is not known for being controversy-averse. Jautz was the man who hired Glenn Beck at Headline News. With all the crap that Beck has said, we are now supposed to believe that Jautz was suddenly shocked by Sanchez’s remarks? Beck said that he hated the 9/11 victims’ families while he was working for Jautz. Then there was the time that Beck asked Keith Ellison, a Muslim member of Congress, to “prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.” Yet Jautz didn’t rush to call security and have Beck removed from the studio.

Beck has continued his reign of error at Fox News, famously saying that President Obama was “a racist with a deep-seated hatred for white people.” Yet Fox keeps him on the payroll, as they do Liz Trotta who joked that Obama should be “knocked off” along with Osama. Fox contributor Michael Scheuer opined that the only hope for America was for Bin Laden to hit us again with a WMD. And Ralph Peters, another Fox contributor, advocated military strikes on the media.

There doesn’t seem to be an outer limit of acceptable behavior for Fox. Which makes it a great place to work for bigots and psychopaths who won’t have to worry about saying something totally insane. On the other hand, MSNBC has David Shuster on an indefinite suspension for having done a screen test for CNN. And they canceled Don Imus for making racially insensitive comments about a women’s basketball team (he now works for, that’s right … Fox). CBS fired Jimmy the Greek. ESPN canned Rush Limbaugh. And now CNN shows Sanchez the door. Fox may not have a crossable line, but every other network seems to.

Still, I have to wonder what precipitated Sanchez’s departure. Could it really have been a revulsion of his clearly offensive remarks? Or did he walk out indignantly after being reprimanded? Perhaps Jautz wanted the schedule cleared for some new programming he is developing. Who knows? It just seems like there is more to this than has been made public. We may not know the answers for a while, or until Sanchez tweets. But just for old times sake, here are a couple of occasions where Sanchez did some work for which he could actually be proud:

~~~

This will actually be a good opportunity to find out what kind of programmer Jautz intends to be. Will he fill Sanchez’s slot with his next Beck-like discovery? Will he shoot for more tabloid sensationalism? Or will he develop a show that has journalistic ethics and standards and returns CNN to its original mission of producing honest news?

For the record, I had a suggestion for a new CNN program when Campbell Brown left the network: Replace Campbell Brown With The Daily Show. The idea still works. A man can dream, can’t he?

Fox News Pimp James O’Keefe Tries To Deep Throat CNN

Posted by on September 29, 2010 at 11:42 am. 3 Comments :

James O'KeefeFox News porn star and convicted impostor James O’Keefe has managed to land himself in the news again in another embarrassing exploit that is becoming routine for this loser.

CNN is reporting that O’Keefe attempted to ensnare a CNN reporter in a juvenile and salacious prank aboard his boat that was designed to embarrass the reporter and the network:

“A conservative activist known for making undercover videos plotted to embarrass a CNN correspondent by recording a meeting on hidden cameras aboard a floating ‘palace of pleasure’ and making sexually suggestive comments, e-mails and a planning document show.

James O’Keefe, best known for hitting the community organizing group ACORN with an undercover video sting, hoped to get CNN Investigative Correspondent Abbie Boudreau onto a boat filled with sexually explicit props and then record the session, those documents show. “

The first place O’Keefe went wrong was in thinking that any rendezvous with him would constitute a “palace of pleasure.” More like a “rathole of wretch.” O’Keefe’s scheme was so misguided and revolting that his own accomplice blew the whistle and alerted Boudreau to the plot. Additionally, emails and other documents were obtained that revealed how lame and desperate O’Keefe is trying to come up with a sequel to his ACORN escapade. Those documents include detailed plans that described setting up their love boat with a condom jar, dildos, pornography, fuzzy handcuffs, and a mirror on the ceiling. O’Keefe’s plan called for him to make an introductory speech for the video that went like this:

“My name is James, I work in video activism and journalism. I’ve been approached by CNN for an interview where I know what their angle is: they want to portray me and my friends as crazies, as non-journalists, as unprofessional and likely as homophobes, racists or bigots of some sort…”

“Instead, I’ve decided to have a little fun. Instead of giving her a serious interview, I’m going to punk CNN. Abbie has been trying to seduce me to use me, in order to spin a lie about me. So, I’m going to seduce her, on camera, to use her for a video. This bubble-headed-bleach-blonde who comes on at five will get a taste of her own medicine, she’ll get seduced on camera and you’ll get to see the awkwardness and the aftermath.”

“Please sit back and enjoy the show.”

Gee. I wonder why anyone would want to portray O’Keefe and his friends as crazies and non-journalists. All the great investigative reporters in the past have sought to seduce their colleagues who were working on stories about them. Edward R. Murrow would never go anywhere without a jar of condoms, and Bob Woodward’s dildo collection was legendary. He would never have won over Deep Throat without it. The planning document also contained a projection of how they thought the dialogue would go between O’Keefe and Boudreau:

AB: Is this a gag?
JO: Abbie, I’m not really into S&M, so I don’t have any toys like that…
AB: No, is this a joke, are you kidding?
JO: Oh, I’m sorry, I thought you were talking about S&M, what do you mean is this a gag?
AB: You can’t be serious, I’m married.
JO: Abbie, there’s never going to be a right time for you and I. There’s only right now. We have to make the most of the time we’re given, and we’re being given right now.
AB: Are you serious?
JO: I’ve never met a woman like you, one who had the drive, ambition, and the same creative power, the same creative juice. We’re the same person Abbie, We’re meant to be together. I’m serious because my heart is serious.
AB: James, this is not professional.

Boudreau wrote in her response to this scam that it was so juvenile she suspected that the real scam was the revealing of the fake scam. That shows good sense on her part. For anyone else that might have been the case (and maybe still is). After all, in his own dialogue he has Boudreau behaving professionally and rejecting his advances. Here is Boudreau’s video account of the meeting:

O’Keefe really is this juvenile. It fits his persona that is obsessively preoccupied with sex (i.e. his pimp and hooker routine). And speaking of persona, here is how his document described the one O’Keefe planned to assume: “James should have a more sleazy persona than normal.” That’s a tall order, but one I’m sure O’Keefe is up to. And he even has a contingency in the event his plot is discovered that includes this advice:

“…point out the hypocrisy in CNN using the inherent sexuality of these women to sell viewers and for ratings, passing up more esteemed and respectable journalists who aren’t bubble-headed bleach blondes…”

I assume he means more esteemed and respectable journalists like Gretchen Carlson, Martha MacCallum, Megyn Kelly, and Courtney Friel. Compare those brainiacs to Candy Crowley or Susan Candiotti or Christiane Amanpour (who recently moved over to ABC).

Remember, O’Keefe is best known for his prank on ACORN wherein he reportedly dressed up as a pimp and accompanied his hooker (Hannah Giles) to ACORN offices to elicit some sort of embarrassing video. As it turns out, he never wore the pimp outfit as he claimed. That was part of his elaborate and misleading editing of the video done after the fact. ACORN was later absolved of any wrongdoing and were shown to have acted appropriately in reporting O’Keefe to the police.

He went on from there to his now famous affair in the office of Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. That mission got him a conviction for pretending to be a telephone repairman and seeking access to the Senator’s phone system.

After that, O’Keefe enlisted himself in a census scam wherein he tried to assert some sort of impropriety on the part of the census takers. That scheme was so devoid of content or authenticity that Breitbart wouldn’t even carry it.

It is important to note that O’Keefe is not some fringe player on the right who is dismissed by more sober and thoughtful conservatives. He was featured on Fox News numerous times and was named the Power Player of the Week by Chris Wallace, anchor of Fox News Sunday. He is supported and published by Andrew Breitbart, one of the right’s most popular media mavens. He won the Impact Award at the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this year.

The conservative establish embraces their young soldier, they are proud of him. And why shouldn’t they be? He represents all of the same values of corruption and deception that has been part of the right’s platform for decades. He is their puppy and they will honor and protect him. What do you think the odds are of Fox News covering this story?

[Update, 9/30/10] As expected, there was no reporting on this story by Fox News. Not a single report about their rising star whom they featured so prominently a few months ago. Also, Andrew Breitbart not only failed to post a story about his protege’s pleasure palace, he denied in a tweet that he was even associated with him. Never mind the fact that O’Keefe posted a story on BigGovernment just one week ago.

Uh Oh. CNN Takes A Sharp Turn Toward Hell

Posted by on September 25, 2010 at 1:50 pm. 4 Comments :

Remember the old days when CNN was the dominant cable news network? Or the even older days when it was the only cable news network? I didn’t think so. It was a long time ago. Viewers today don’t appreciate how remarkable an achievement it was to launch a 24 hour news channel when nothing like it existed at the time.

Whether or not you like Ted Turner, you have to give him credit for being a pioneer, although given the state of cable news today, I’m not sure he’d want the credit/blame. However, he recognized the unique environment in which his experiment was born, and he further recognized the changes that took place in subsequent years that preclude anyone from ever doing the same (see My Beef With Big Media).

Now CNN is mired in third place, overtaken by a bombastic, right-wing, agenda-driven, Fox News, and a lukewarm, marginally liberal, MSNBC. So it should come as no surprise that the brass at CNN would be looking to shake things up in hopes of recovering their glory days. To that end, yesterday CNN announced that its president, Jon Klein, would be leaving the network. That, in and of itself, would appear to be a routine response to poor performance in the marketplace. The problem here is not that Klein is leaving. It’s who they are elevating to his post that is worrisome.

Ken Jautz, presently the head of CNN’s HLN (formerly known as Headline News Network) has been tapped to replace Klein. He is a brash, iconoclastic, executive who is more interested in ratings than journalism. But perhaps the most disturbing item on Jautz’s resume is that he is the man who brought Glenn Beck to HLN, and to television. Looking back at that millstone in broadcast media is one of the best ways of getting a handle on what may be in store for a Juatz-run CNN. Here is what he had to say upon hiring Beck back in January of 2006:

“Glenn Beck is the next piece of the puzzle,” said HLN prexy Ken Jautz. “Glenn’s style is self-deprecating, cordial; he says he’d like to be able to disagree with guests and part as friends. It’s conversational, not confrontational.”

If Beck is Jautz’s idea of cordial, I hope never to meet anyone he considers to be rude. What’s more, Beck is not known for having guests with whom he disagrees, friendly or otherwise. And the notion that he is not confrontational is absurd on its face. Calling the President a racist; charging that progressives are a cancer; tagging anyone with whom he disagrees a Marxist; declaring his hatred for Woodrow Wilson as well as 9/11 families; these are not behaviors generally associated with being non-confrontational. Jautz went on to say…

“As part of the continued evolution of the network, we wanted another primetime show,” Jautz said. “We didn’t look for a conservative, a liberal or anyone of a particular ideology. It was about getting the best talent that would resonate with the most viewers.”

Well then, it’s a good thing he wasn’t actually looking for a conservative. He would have ended up with a modern version of Attila the Hun (or did he anyway?). It should also be noted that his desire to find the “best talent” who would “resonate” with viewers, was unfulfilled. Beck’s show was a dismal ratings failure on HLN. He would not be a success until he moved to Fox News with its built-in audience of pre-cooked FoxBots.

Given the remarks Jautz made when taking over HLN and bringing Beck into the fold, it is fair to say that he was somewhat disingenuous with regard to his public appraisals. And he was similarly disingenuous in private. In the book “Common Nonsense: Glenn Beck And The Triumph Of Ignorance,” author Alexander Zaitchik noted that Jautz mislead his employers at the time as to his intentions in reforming the channel:

“Facing a staff weary of rumored changes, Jautz gently presented Blue Sky [his programming initiative] as a trial balloon. He promised that CNN standards would not be diluted in the makeover and that soon-to-be-hired Headline News personalities would not appear on traditional CNN news programming. He broke both promises.”

Indeed he did. Glenn Beck not only appeared on CNN, he was permitted to fill in as a guest host on Larry King Live. Taking into consideration the duplicity of Jautz’s comments when he assumed command of HLN, it might be prudent to take note of what he is saying now with regard to his promotion at CNN. Jautz was interviewed by The Wrap and said…

Q: Can we expect a tone change, or any sort of ideological shift?
A: I think that CNN needs to be as lively and engaging and as informative as it is known for its reporting.

Whatever that means.

Q: For a long time, Jon Klein resisted any sort of partisan programming — especially as expressed by the hosts. Can we expect to see more opinions — or at least opinionated hosts — under your watch?
A: CNN has always been about adhering to non-partisan programming in general. And it will continue to be.

However, I do not believe that “facts-only” programming … it will not work. Viewers, if they’re looking for just the news, they can get that anywhere now. The news that happened that day, they probably know already. They want context, perspective and opinion. And we’re going to give that to them. As long as it’s non-partisan, in the aggregate, from all ends of the spectrum.

In other words, we will continue to be non-partisan except when we’re being opinionated. And none of those pesky “facts” that clutter up the news.

Jautz did improve the standing of HLN. But he did it by ramping up the volume with shouters like Beck and Nancy Grace, and by diving head-first into the tabloid world of pop culture and celebrity gossip. Could that approach help to restore CNN’s prior leadership? Who cares? It isn’t what anyone who truly cares about responsible journalism would want.

And that’s the problem with contemporary corporate media: It is more interested in serving the shareholders than in serving the public. Unless Jautz has recently had a revelatory transformation, CNN has taken a giant step backwards by giving him the reins to the network. The prospect of the man who launched Glenn Beck’s television career running a cable news network is troubling, to say the least.

In related news, NBC/Universal has announced that it’s chief executive, Jeff Zucker, will also be leaving his post. This is an entirely different situation than the one at CNN. NBC is presently the number one network in evening news, morning news, and Sunday news. CNBC is still the top business channel. Plus, under Zucker’s reign, MSNBC moved up from third place to second. The staffing change at NBC is due to its imminent acquisition by Comcast. It remains to be seen who will be replacing Zucker.

Sometimes these sort of changes are merely shifts designed to put a new management’s imprint on the merged entity. But Comcast has baggage that makes it important to keep an eye on them. And they will have an unprecedented range of influence as a result of the merger. Stay tuned.

Dumbass Of The Day: Erick Erickson

Posted by on August 14, 2010 at 1:31 pm. 1 Comments :

Congratulations are in order for Erick Erickson of RedState and CNN. He has run away with today’s Dumbass Award despite many deserving contestants. Here is a series of Tweets from Erickson that lowered him to the depths of depravity:

How exactly do our founding principles require the President to support a mosque at ground zero?

People citing freedom of religion as the reason Obama says our founding principles *demand* he support the mosque are not that bright.

Paging the Church of Satan: Our founding principles demand Barack Obama support your rights to human sacrifice. Carry on.

Paging random religious sects that still practice polygamy: our founding principles demand Barack Obama support group marriage.

Paging Islamofascists: Our founding principles demand Barack Obama support Jihad.

First of all, Dumbass, The mosque is NOT at ground zero. It is three blocks away. Secondly, our founding principles include the free exercise of religion. You may not think that supporting the First Amendment is bright, but that’s just your dumbassedness clouding what remains of your reason.

Finally, your comparison of constructing a legal building to human sacrifice, polygamy, and terrorism, all of which are against the law, demonstrates how worthy you are of this award.

Congratulations Dumbass.

America Hates The Media – Thank You Fox News

Posted by on August 14, 2010 at 12:39 pm. 5 Comments :

A new survey by the Gallup organization reveals that Americans have all but given up on old media services like newspapers and television. Only about 25% of respondents say that they have a “great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in either. This puts the legacy media on a par with perennially hated institutions like banks, HMOs and congress.

It isn’t difficult to surmise the reason for this deep distrust. While the media has long been held in low esteem, there was a noticeable decline that began in the mid-1990s. Since that time confidence has dropped about 30%. And just as a point of interest, Fox News launched in 1996.

There isn’t really anything coincidental about it. Fox News has always had as its purpose the discrediting of news as an institution. I made the case for this last year in Fox News Confidential: The Truth Behind Its Secret Mission:

The real mission of Fox News is [cue trumpets] to so thoroughly tarnish the practice of journalism that majorities of the public would recoil in disgust at all of it. Murdoch and Ailes knew that the introduction of a single cable network would have a difficult time enshrouding the whole of the mediasphere in their veil of lies. So rather than try to change people’s minds, they would endeavor to poison the relationship that people have with the press.

Mission accomplished. By trivializing journalism with tabloid-style sensationalism, and diluting its authority with speculation and hyperbolic opinion, Fox has succeeded in producing large majorities of the American public who are now repulsed by the “mainstream” media that barges into their homes every day. The lies Fox News spews are secondary to the campaign of defamation that they launched against the media as a whole. As a result, their fictional accounts of current events are more enduring because people are paying less attention overall.

The saddest part of this scenario is that the non-Fox media have essentially cooperated with Fox’s disparagement of them. Rather than defend themselves and the integrity of their profession, they went along and allowed Fox to create the negative impressions that are now dominant in society. Even worse, they actually helped to reinforce those impressions.

The Washington Post apologized for not covering more of the fakery of Andrew Breitbart. CNN bent over backwards to endorse the wacko wing of the right by hiring RedState’s Erick Erickson. MSNBC continues to host disreputable characters like Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan. And everybody persists in covering non-entities like Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. With respect to the latter, Sarah Palin just came in fourth (pdf) amongst Republicans in a preference poll for 2012. And the Tea Party registered a measly (pdf) 30% favorable rating with an even smaller percentage (25%) saying they would vote for a candidate with a Tea Party affiliation. Yet these two subjects get wall-to-wall coverage across the media spectrum.

Perhaps if newspaper and television reporters would cover issues that actually address the interests of their audience they would not be so universally reviled. If they could manage to resist the melodramatic minutiae that Fox News has embraced they could recover some of their lost respect. And above all they need to put objectivity and honesty at the top of their agenda, not ratings and revenue.

In other words, if they deliver a product that is informative and useful, and contributes to people’s lives, profits and popularity will follow. If they continue to pursue the Fox model they will only succeed in further damaging their reputation and their prospects for the future. To say nothing about the damage they are doing to a country whose democracy relies on a well-informed population.

The Opportunity At CNN: Replace Campbell Brown With The Daily Show

Posted by on May 19, 2010 at 6:15 pm. 6 Comments :

CNN Daily ShowNow that Campbell Brown has announced that she will be signing off of her CNN show, CNN has an opportunity to advance the state of journalism. They are the network that claims to be the champions of straight news and they dismiss the partisanship that is so deeply ingrained in Fox News and, to a lesser extent, MSNBC. So if they are serious, they need to take a long, hard look at themselves and begin to construct the sort of ethical news enterprise to which they claim to aspire.

The first thing they need to recognize is that they presently have no exclusive claim to being non-partisan. The only difference between them and their competition is that their hosts are not overtly partisan. But the substance of many of their programs is just mashed together panels of left and right pundits who argue with one another. That’s not non-partisan, it’s multi-partisan. More importantly, it’s not journalism.

If they are serious, CNN needs to fill this timeslot with a program that doesn’t seek to attain some sort of fabled balance. Balance is a phony metric. Journalism is not served when you balance reporting about say, the dangers of cigarettes, with a segment about how smoking cures cancer. The standard should not be balance, it should be truth.

One of the best examples of truth-telling in the media today is The Daily Show. Sure it’s funny and the correspondents are clowns (which is something they have in common with Fox News correspondents), but there is a determined effort to cast aside bullshit and back up their humor with facts. The technique of juxtaposing video of a politician making contradictory statements was a Daily Show innovation that has been picked up by some “real” news programs.

Am I seriously proposing that The Daily Show replace Campbell Brown? Let’s just say that I’m only half joking. It’s important to note that The Daily Show is not a news information show, in that it is not a collection of reports about what happened during the day. There is a presumption that their viewers already know what’s going on. It is also not political satire. It is media satire. Almost every segment is about how the media covers stories rather than the content of the stories themselves.

I think that a daily program that addresses the way news is presented would be a welcome addition to CNN’s schedule. By eight o’clock in the evening there has been plenty of time to observe and critique the reporting that occurred during the day. If they need additional time they could do the previous day. This would be more than a dry exercise in fact-checking. While taking a more sober tone than Jon Stewart, it could still be a raucous affair that would be both fun and enlightening. They could use dynamic and fast-paced Entertainment Tonight style graphics and charming, but well informed, hosts. They could even bring in special correspondents on occasion (I would recommend Stewart or other actual Daily Show personalities).

This show could provide true competition to the O’Reilly/Olbermann/Grace block that dominates the time period. It could also be a bellwether program that holds the media feet to the fire. They would have to play fair and include CNN’s flubs. Preferably it would be produced independently. But if they executed it right, I think many viewers would find it a refreshing change from the shoutfests on the other cable nets. Then CNN could use it to anchor a slate of truly responsible newscasts.

The only question is: Are the program executives at CNN smart enough to listen to me? Of course, they probably don’t even know I exist. Consequently, look for CNN to add another interminable hour of John King.