CNN And Democrat Party: Network News Editors Set The Agenda
DESPITE a ratings record of 4.4 million viewers, it looks like the biggest loser of Wednesday’s debate in Florida could be CNN.
The network is being criticized for having a liberal bias. And the fact that an unpaid adviser to Hillary Clinton was able to ask a question of the Republican candidates is the least of their problems.
The main charge against CNN, and one that seems to have strong basis in fact, is that the editorial team cherrypicked issues that a liberal assumes would matter to conservatives – like god, guns and gays – and ignored more substantive issues like healthcare, energy and education.
As Roger Simon, of Politico.com, wrote shortly after the debate: “The serious issues directly affecting the daily lives of ordinary citizens were barely touched upon at all.”
Certainly, as Personal Democracy Forum points out, the environment, healthcare and education were among the top 40 viewed questions submitted to YouTube.
Yet CNN editors ignored them, limiting candidates to questions on subjects such as immigration, gun control and the confederate flag.
According to Fred Barnes, of the Weekly Standard, “there were 6 [questions] on immigration, 3 on guns, 2 on abortion, 2 on gays, and one on whether the candidates believe every word in the Bible. These are exactly the issues, in the view of liberals and many in the media, on which Republicans look particularly unattractive. And there were two questions by African Americans premised loosely on the notion that blacks get nothing from Republicans and have no reason to vote for them.”
Conservative bloggers at RedState are calling on Republican candidates to boycott CNN and they’re calling for executive heads to roll.
Meanwhile, Michelle Malkin is keeping a running total of the number of questioners who it turns out have links to the Democrat Party. At last count she was at five.
CNN is standing by its editing process, saying the network were focused on the questions, not the questioners.
But if that’s the case, it still did a terrible job considering the hammering it’s now taking.
Added to that is the quesion that few people seem to be asking: If a network news editor is going to decide which questions are asked at a debate, what’s the point in having user-generated videos in the first place?
Posted: 30th, November 2007 | In: Politicians Comment (1) | TrackBack | Permalink
