Spinbuster: CJR takes CNN to task

[quinnox]

Good article from Columbia Journalism Review on CNN's biased reporting of Democratis Convention. Some highlights:

Campaign Desk decided to watch an evening of CNN's convention coverage, and identify where it went astray. It wasn't hard. The excerpts below are all quotes from CNN reporters or their guests from last night's coverage, divided into broad themes. Many are not necessarily, in themselves, instances of journalistic mealfeasance. But taken together, they give a sense of the way CNN has been covering the proceedings in Boston.

Critics of both think, by contrast, that CNN, badly bruised in the ratings war, has stooped to slavish imitation of Fox's most dubious ploys and policies.

1) CNN is so desperate for conflict that it's willing to repeat every possible Republican-generated criticism, without making any attempt to sort through which are valid and which aren't. This often entails allowing Republicans to recycle charges which have been shown to be untrue or misleading, without correcting them (quotes are excerpts, not continuous): <gives numerous examples>

2) An equal obsession Kerry's vote against the $87 billion to fund the Iraq war, along with a complete inability to report accurately on the issue:

Greenfield: Undecided voters who were thinking about maybe replacing Kerry, will feedback to you unprodded. I was for the 87 billion before and I voted against it, a line the Republicans are use in their campaign. That was probably the most effective shot aimed at John Kerry.

Blitzer: But you know the criticism, general, that we keep hearing, he voted to go to war in Iraq and that after the War, he voted against the $87 billion to pay for the body armor, to pay for the support of the troops in Iraq. <gives other examples>

...

5) There was also near-constant repetition from CNN of the assumption that voters see Democrats as weaker on national security:

Woodruff: Historically, Democrats have had trouble with that issue. Ever since Vietnam and George McGovern who we talked to in this hall today. Democrats have to time and again prove they're as strong as building up the military, building up the Pentagon, the defenses of this country. John Kerry has that trouble this year. <gives other examples>

6) And of course, a slew of miscellaneous instances of nonsensical reporting:

Crowley: So mostly, John Edwards will talk about John Kerry, who finally made it to town aboard a slow boat to Charleston named the "Lulu E," a teensy bit outside the muscular image the Kerry campaign is hoping to conjure up to show voters he's tough too.

<gives other examples>

http://www.campaigndesk.org/archives/000781.asp

[PDittie]

1. turn CNN off, permanently

and be sure and send them an e-mail telling them why you are doing so.

They cannot be successful being Fox-Lite any more than Joe Lieberman was successful being GOP-lite.

[Shopaholic]

2. Well, this at least proves what we've been saying forever

and a day. I'm glad that CJR has called them on this bullshit. Now we all need to continue to call them on their clearly biased and inaccurate "reporting".

[Robbien]

3. Even better than that, email CBS and/or Fox sending them this

article and cc CNN. CNN will see that Fox and the mainstreams will know CNN is a fake.

[liberalcanuck]

11. Amen to that my friend. I've had it with watching CNN... I'm going

to do as you've suggested. I'll send the Chicken Noodle Network an email telling them why I'm tuning them out and start watching PBS. The coverage during the convention was absolutely horribly. I screamed audibly at my television more than a few times during most pundit's commentary.

[goclark]

15. Joe is still GOP morre than Lite

[Rockholm]

4. I watched 99.5% of the Convention on C-Span...

The other .5% was spent this way. Whenever a BIG speaker came on, I turned to the big 3 networks, PBS, NECN, FAUX, CNN, and MSRNC to see IF they were covering the speech or just blathering on and on against the Democrats. And that is ALL they were doing. I have been off of CNN for a while now. I can only look at it for a few seconds at a time. During the Convention, CNN had kids passing out CNN buttons. I refused every time, telling them that I do not support republican television.

[qanda]

5. That's downright frightening!

eom

[Shopaholic]

6. They've got a forum where you can register and comment

on their posts too at CJR. I've added it to my "favorites" list.

[Neecy]

7. CNN is so transparent

I'm glad that this article validated what many of us were saying during convention week - that CNN's 'journalists' and 'reporters' just threw around unsubtantiated GOP claims without verifying the veracity of these claims. Just Republican mouthpieces (of course, they also did this repeatedly in 2000).

What's really obscene is the Ralph Reed commentary after Edwards, and the Ed Gillespie commentary after Kerry.

CNN isn't trusted, and what they bring us isn't news, it's only Republican spin and lies.

[DeepModem Mom]

8. Damn, it's frustrating to feel so powerless...

against the "liberal" media, watching them constantly con the people instead of doing the job they're meant to do -- must do -- in a democracy.

Thanks for posting this, quinnox; it's there in black and white, the subtle, and not-so-subtle manipulation.

[randr]

9. I agree that they are obsessed with conflict--however

on one occasion it backfired on them.
They had an editor of the New York Daily News, whose name escapes me, on for what was billed as the conservative response to Kerry's speech.
His first statement was that he did not think the people at CNN were going to like his remarks.
He went on to state that if B* and team do not make some serious corrections in their campaign we may have just witnessed th presidential acceptance speech!
Similar comments were ushered forth from even the likes of Joe Scar---.
We are witnessing conservative meltdown as they are confronted with the existence of their own grey zone!
Now if they could just get control of the color adjustment they may begin to see the light!

[greekspeak]

10. Who wants to start a pool as to when Pukes will start lambasting CJR

as "librul?" They are some of those egghead elitists that want to close down all our churches and take our Lord and Savior Shrub away from us and replace him with pope-worshipping Massachussets liberal John Kerry and his used-car salesmanesque runningmate John Edwards.

And how long before the FBI et al start tracking the readers of CJR as "terraists?"

[Hidebo]

12. I don't think Greenfield is anti-kerry

Greenfield: Undecided voters who were thinking about maybe replacing Kerry, will feedback to you unprodded. I was for the 87 billion before and I voted against it, a line the Republicans are use in their campaign. That was probably the most effective shot aimed at John Kerry.

So... what's wrong with this comment.

[Eloriel]

21. What's wrong with it is that he didn't bother to add any CORRECT

information -- just recycled the spin. A REAL journalist would have included the FACT of why Kerry voted the way he did. For fairness and balance, dontchaknow.

[KharmaTrain]

13. The CJR Is Some Serious Stuff...

These are the same folks who issue the Armstrong Awards...the highest honor a journalist can earn. This isn't a think tank or PAC, CJR is considered non-partisan and a great observer of the media.

In the 80's, it was the CJR that produced reports that the Right Wing used to tatoo CBS as being "too liberal" or the "Communist Broadcasting System". Now the shoe's on the other foot.

Instead of tuning out...pass this post along to people you know...especially those who don't believe there's bias in what they were watching. Also this is a great time for them to review the coverage of the DNC and see if it's identical to that of the RNC. Let's keep a very close eye on what they're doing, use this forum and others to point out the biases as we see them (DU was great during the DNC...no sooner was their an RNC lie on the air, people here were responding and rebuking it). Remember, it was the non-stop drumbeat from the right wing of media bias that has created this culture where anything shown that isn't strictly from the right perspective...even moderate, is considered "liberal".

Also, send copies of this to your LOCAL papers...not CBS, and definitely not CNN (think they're gonna wanna see this in their mail???)...enough OP/Eds show up in local towns around the country and I assure you the suits at CNN are gonna take some notice. Will this change things? Doubtful, but the best we can expect at this time is just to do like these folks at Columbia have...keep track of the lies and distortions and highlight and refute them with the facts.

[AnnInLa]

14. Also MSNBC

alot of interesting articles out there now that assert that both CNN and MSNBC have "dummied down" their reporting, trying to capture the more-monied Conservative watchers, ie, take some of the Fox market. Internal memos from MSNBC show that Phil Donahoe was fired because he was too liberal, and they were worried about having a liberal image.

Jesus, please let us get a Liberal Network!

[TWiley]

16. I called CNN and bitched

Now, I will be looking for another news source. Unfortunately, the republican Butt-Wipes have started to take over NPR as well. I have heard several political campaign ads for bushwad that were thinly veiled as "news stories" on NPR recently.

Will CNN hire Democratic (they fired, or failed to promote most of them)commentaries for the republiklan national convention?

Let me do it.

"gee Dave, did you just hear what that republiklan ass-wipe just said" "I sure did Steve, that just goes to show you that when a republiklan's lips are moving then they are lying." "And another thing Dave, have you noticed how ugly they are without the bedsheets and pointy white hats on?" "I sure have Steve, but i think that you missed the point here." "This goes to show you why the one true Christian God calls Satan "The Accuser, The Slanderer, and the Father of Lies" "In fact, it has been rumored that victoria clarke is actually Satan's wife"

Boy could I have fun with that.

[mdguss]

17. MSNBC seems to have made a gamble:

Their coverage was actually pretty good. Scarbourough was being objective and saying when he thought things were good--he was pointing out weaknesses with both Bush and Kerry. And Ron Reagan was there to balance him out. At one point Pat Buchanan even uttered this phrase, "I could readily vote for Kerry." (Granted he preceeded that with the phrase, "If I didn't know better,").

Matthews can be kind of shrill, but he asks tough questions to both sides.

It seems like MSNBC has decided to objective for the most part. Their ratings increased during the week--I wouldn't be suprised if they end up in the number 2 spot for the week.

CNN was pro-Bush in 2000; it is pro-Bush now. I, for one, hope that they sink to number three in the ratings. Especially lame was their use of Mo Racca--who might be funny--but isn't appropriate for a serious event in a serious time. They were sending a message that the issues didn't matter, that it was all lame anyway, when in fact they do matter. That's why I don't watch CNN. The CONSERVATIVE NEWS NETWORK.

[Bush was AWOL]

18. MSNBC is much better than CNN lately

in their coverage. Plus, CNN has the most dull personalities of any news network.

[calimary]

19. They were actually, in some cases, LIGHTYEARS better than CNN.

That's pretty much all I watched, besides CSPAN, and especially the "After Hours" programming with Ron Reagan and Joe Scarborough. I kept turning to my husband and commenting - "Scarborough must not be feeling well." Frankly, I was somewhat shocked to watch Joe Scarborough. He behaved as though he had just been taken out and spanked for being such a prick. He was measured, ACTUALLY pretty fair-minded, and even-handed. Shockingly, he even had some positive comments and observations to make about what the Dems were doing and saying. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.

This is important, guys. This CJR item is merely more proof. More ammo. But from an even more credible source. The Columbia Journalism Review is no ragsheet. It's very well-respected. This is a heat-seeking missile.

[calimary]

22. So Here's What You DO: Check Post 13 here by IMRadioactive.

MANY good points here.

USE THIS in battle as the Excellent Sword of Truth that it is.

Also use this: the FACT that MSNBC enjoyed a growth in viewership during the convention. Why do you suppose that is? Because unlike CNN (that's trying to channel the Pox "news" network, hoping to beat them at their own game), MSNBC seems to have decided to go the other way, and cater more to viewers who do NOT watch Pox (I also call it the "Ding-Dong Network" for their tolling-bell theme music) - whose interests and preferences are BEING IGNORED. Somebody at MSNBC has realized that there is a huge, untapped audience out there - and nobody else is trying to grab for it. Maybe somebody at MSNBC saw the last ratings for the New York metro area (about the only place in the country where you can compare Air America with the limbaugh-types, head-to-head) and saw the Air America programs beating the tar out of limbaugh, hannity, and everybody/anybody else. In timeslot after timeslot. This Is Fact. This Is What Actually Happened. The numbers don't lie.

--WHEN YOU CALL CNN - (404) 827 - 0234, and then press 8 to bypass the long recorded intro - you can give them your complaints.

--You can demand that they change their slant, because you can't watch them anymore. You say you could only stomach it for a little bit on Monday and then they DROVE YOU AWAY with their conservative bias.

--You THEN tell them that you know what they've been up to because you've been READING about it (to shut anybody up who might say - "well, how do you know what we're doing if you're not even watching?"), and cite the Columbia Journalism Review as an example of what you've read.

--You THEN tell them they have LOST you as a viewer because you do NOT need OR want a SECOND FOX NETWORK, that they insult you as a person because YOU are a Democrat and YOU are a liberal and all they're doing is bringing people on who insult and lie and distort about liberals and Democrats, and you can't help but take it personally. You tell them you WILL NOT BE BACK until they bring more liberals on board.

--You tell them you watched the rest of the convention on CSPAN, AND on MSNBC, with that Ron Reagan guy who's so smart and honest and is FINALLY standing up for YOUR side, and that you will continue to watch people like him.

--THEN, you ChALLENGE them. "Do your producers plan to bring on as many Democrats and liberals to comment on the republi-CON convention this month, also? I mean, in the interest of being FAIR AND BALANCED?"

Look, guys: This stuff is NOW OUT THERE.

We have Michael Moore who's shown how the media has been such a cabal of toadies and whores for the republi-CONS.

We have Air America.

We have "OUTFOXED."

And now we have the Columbia Journalism Review.

They can't hide from this anymore.

And since this stuff is now out there in the public arena and people ARE acknowledging that this is real and factual and actually happening, and it's in the public dialogue more and more, and it's getting written about and further acknowledged, we have to do one more thing:

TAKE ALL THIS EVIDENCE AND RUB THEIR NOSES IN IT!!!!

Then take a breather for a moment, AND DO IT AGAIN!!!!

CNN has to be FORCE-FED this, by as many of us as possible, for it to sink in and really take effect. The Pox/limbaugh/rove contingent can martial its forces by the thousands. They're noisy, rude, combative, and BOY do they write in and call and harass! WE ABSOLUTELY MUST PROVIDE A COUNTER-OFFENSIVE. For EVERY action (theirs) WE MUST PROVIDE A REACTION!!! We JUST MUST!!!

Can't overstress this, guys. Yes, we are at "war." THIS IS THE WAR.

[calimary]

23. The companion piece to this is - You Must Call MSNBC and let them know

that they did WELL, and that you are a convert - BECAUSE they took a more balanced view, and unlike CNN they WEREN'T trashing the Democrats and liberals all the time. You found that refreshing and a MOST welcome change, since you, too, are a Democrat and a liberal, and you will be watching them a lot more frequently.

MSNBC is actionable on this as well. They just saw their viewership improve. Funny enough, it improved at the expense of CNN. WE NEED TO VERIFY THAT, AS SOME OF THOSE VIEWERS, AND TELL THEM WHY. They not only need to know they did a good job, but they also need to hear exactly WHAT, WHEN, WHY, AND HOW their coverage WAS so good. And you can tell them you switched FROM CNN, because they were TOO BIASED toward republi-CONS.

There's updated contact info on MSNBC in the Master List in Activism/Events.

[KharmaTrain]

25. Thank You Calimary!

From one who worked in "the media" a couple of thoughts here as I enjoy this string.

First, and one that can never be overstated to those on DU call or write. Do so with style. No name calling, and also avoid using obvious political terms that make you sound more like a robot than an individual. Also, be sure to use your REAL name. I've been amazed to get emails of flames to CNN or whomever and it's signed by "Stinging Spider"...sorry, that cred may be cool on message boards, but this is just like sending a resume or an appeal.

Remember, these networks get a ton of mail every day and the email flood this past week on both networks, good and bad, were probably at very high levels. I somewhat pity the poor operators at CNN as they get an earful from many of us, and also wingnuts who, believe it or not, think the coverage is "too liberal". Look at the Freeper threads complaining how many Democrats there were being interviewed at the Democratic convention (doh!).

I always try to make the argument with the assumption CNN has already had a ton of hate email and calls and are pretty much numb to the same old criticisms. If anything it may embolden them as if there are as many negative calls from the right (or even half as many as the left) it's assumed then the reporting is balanced. Nuance means nothing.

When you write, attempt to be as "pithy" (I hate that word now) and specific. If there's a specific slam Judy Woof Woof makes or there's a segment that has 3 Conservatives and no Democrat, note the time and the people on the tube. They keep logs of all this stuff that then makes it easier, if someone does take an interest in your bitch, to review the incident in question and be able to reply.

We're not going to change CNN all of a sudden...it took years for them to slide into the whorehouse they are now (and this said by an over 20 year viewer...BTW, always mention how long you've viewed them...and be honest), but at least it'd be nice to see some folks here get responses rather than frustrated.

Again, no slams at those who feel the need to vent, and sometimes a flaming email is better than beating up the TV, but I also rarely see responses here from all these flames. I do see them from very straight forward letters that create specific reference points that can be used to continue the discussion.

Definitely call MSNBC and even CNN when they do something good...as 1 person will call to say something good while 100 will call when something is bad...you tell me who gets remembered? You get a lot more flies with honey than vinegar.

[calimary]

26. No. Thank YOU, IM! This is BEYOND EXCELLENT advice.

I'm putting it in the Master List thread in Activism/Events as soon as this reply is posted. WORTHY, WORTHY, WORTHY!

[KharmaTrain]

27. A Good Feeling...

Still being a rebel at 50...an activist? LOL. There are a lot more things we can do...constructive and possibly effective...at least a lot better than beating heads against a message board.

I applaud all your efforts in calling people to action and this is a positive step on being able to take back the "media".

[NightOwwl]

20. How long would it take for the "reporters" to say

"but remember, Bush threatened to veto Kerry's version of the bill that required $10 billion dollars be in the form of a loan.

[Reciprocity]

24. Those of us who are boycotting CNN and have switched to MSNBC.

Need to show our support to our alternative networks. Mine is MSNBC. While I will watch Lou Dobbs and Larry King only if he has someone of interest on. I will no longer vote in any polls they have.

Vote in this poll.
www.question.msnbc.com
President Bush or Senator Kerry: who do you think will keep America safer in the future?