CNN's Industry Spin Shows The Need For Independent Debates

[appalachiablue]

CNN’s Industry Spin Shows Need for Independent Debates. We desperately need serious, independently run debates, not over-the-top industry-friendly spectacles of the sort put on by CNN—and endorsed and gate-kept by the major parties. Julie Hollar, Common Dreams, Aug. 2, 2019.

CNN painfully demonstrated this week why we need independently run presidential debates. With its ESPN-like introductions to the candidates, and its insistence on questions that pit candidates against each other, CNN took an approach to the debates more befitting a football game than an exercise in democracy. The CNN hosts moderated as if they weren’t even listening to what candidates were saying, inflexibly cutting them off after the inevitably too-short 30-to-60-second time limit—in order to offer another, often seemingly randomly selected, candidate the generic prompt, “Your response?” At times, these followed on each other so many times it was unclear what the candidate was even supposed to respond to, or why.

But worse than the entirely unhelpful format was the heavy reliance on right-wing assumptions and talking points to frame the questions. Over the two nights, healthcare dominated the debates; the first night (7/30/19), CNN‘s Jake Tapper kicked off the questions with one to Sen. Bernie Sanders: You support Medicare for All, which would eventually take private health insurance away from more than 150 million Americans, in exchange for government-sponsored healthcare for everyone. Congressman Delaney just referred to it as bad policy. And previously, he has called the idea “political suicide that will just get President Trump re-elected.” What do you say to Congressman Delaney?



- CNN debate viewers got industry talking points on healthcare from CNN moderators, bottom-tier industry-friendly candidates given outsized speaking time, and industry advertisements.

Debate moderators will typically start with top-polling contenders and challenge them to defend their positions. Doing so with attacks from a contender polling below 1%, however, would seem unusual—except that in this case, the candidate unpopular with the public voiced an opinion very popular in corporate media. It was a particularly noteworthy tactic, given that the next night (7/31/19), which also started off with healthcare, CNN lobbed the first challenge to Kamala Harris (polling around fourth place) in the form of an attack on her version of Medicare for All from the top-polling Biden campaign—letting the front-runner start off on the offensive.

Tapper queried multiple candidates the first night about raising taxes on “middle-class Americans” to pay for Medicare for All, and when the floor came back to Sanders, he rebuked Tapper: “By the way, the healthcare industry will be advertising tonight, on this program, with that talking point.” Tapper quickly cut him off, but CNN‘s commercial breaks that night, as observers pointed out, indeed featured healthcare industry ads. In one, the Partnership for America’s Healthcare Future—an industry group—ran an ad talking about how Medicare for All or the public option means “higher taxes or higher premiums; lower-quality care.”

In other words, CNN debate viewers got industry talking points on healthcare from CNN moderators, bottom-tier industry-friendly candidates given outsized speaking time, and industry advertisements...

More, https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/08/02/cnns-industry-spin-shows-need-independent-debates

[Sneederbunk]

1. I find the need for no debates whatsoever until at least October.

[appalachiablue]

3. I can't disagree, the spectacle show suffers from its own weight

[pangaia]

2. to say nothing about how they completely obliterated the stage in that gorgeous movie theater

[appalachiablue]

5. I wanted to see more of the wonderful art deco Fox Theatre (1928) in Detroit:

(Detroit Curbed, July 31, 19) .. The Fox Theatre, the Art Deco masterpiece where the debates are being held has been getting rave reviews from visitors and reporters experiencing the venue’s majesty for the first time.

The Fox Theatre, designed by C. Howard Crane and opening in 1928, contains an eclectic and ornate mix of decorations in Egyptian, Far Eastern and Indian styles. The over-5,000-seat theatre built for the Fox Films chain became a National Historic Landmark in 1989.

It’s also one of the few unquestionably positive redevelopments undertaken by the Ilitch family, which bought the building in 1987. Soon after, they completed a $12 million restoration, built a new marquee, and in 2006, added the multi-story and now iconic “FOX” tower with LED lights. People took to Twitter to express their awe of the venue and share photos...

More, https://detroit.curbed.com/2019/7/31/20748607/fox-theatre-democratic-debates-detroit

[demmiblue]

15. ...

[appalachiablue]

17. Thanks, very interesting. I like old theaters & historic buildings

[Uncle Joe]

4. Kicked and recommended

Thanks for the thread appalachiablue.

[appalachiablue]

6. For sure. Debates should be held by CSpan & PBS, much less $ influence.

[Hortensis]

7. +10,000. And this didn't even mention the consistently

anti-Democratic coverage all through the last general election and already pervading this one, overall with the effect of negatively impacting Democrats and thus benefiting Republicans. It might have taken that dangerous step since a number of studies of 2015-16 provide the data supporting that conclusion.

I haven't looked for 2018, but 2020 will be even more determinative than 2016. We hope. It could turn out that 2012 was our last fairly genuine election.

[alittlelark]

8. The non-partisan 'League of Women Voters' ran them 1928-1988

But they were pushed out during Dukakis/Bush.

[appalachiablue]

9. Too bad, I vaguely remember that. Wish it could be revived..

[loyalsister]

14. They do run local debates for local elections

- in my area, at least. They are honestly presented as side by side, Q&A candidate forums. Some questions are prewritten by the LWV. Audience members can submit their own on paper and the moderator asks.
There is not a lot of sparring or conflict, and we get to see substance.
It may be too civil for teevee, though.

[LincolnRossiter]

10. 100% spot on...

We need independent debates with only serious contenders—and fewer of them. Maybe one more before Iowa. After that, debates on feature the top three finishers/delegate holders after Super Tuesday. Then the top two by April.

If these farces have proven anything, it's that “breakout” performances in these low-stakes clown shows don’t move the needle much. The bottom-tier candidates are still polling at 0-2%. The top four-six don’t really change positions.

[Sherman A1]

11. We very much need to get these debates out of the hands

Of corporate media. There only purpose is to manufacture drama for their horse race narrative and fill airtime between ads for drugs we never knew we needed.

[appalachiablue]

12. You said it, sadly way too late for this critical election..

[brooklynite]

13. I'm sure a sober academic round table on health care funding will attract dozens of viewer...

FWIW - this article makes no suggestion as to what constitutes an "independent" moderator.

[appalachiablue]

16. #8, the non partisan League of Women Voters ran them 1928-1988

PBS and CSPAN are more unbiased

[brooklynite]

18. They weren't done by PBS and CSPAN

They were done on TV Networks with Network correspondents. I think people have forgotten what actually happened and are projecting their hopes into the past.