You know what, I generally don't go out of my way to watch these debates, yet despite my belief that these debates end up becoming silly exercises in well, silliness, I find myself drawn to watching them. I missed Wednesday's GOP/YouTube debate on CNN when it was live, but I did catch the replay and a lot of the post-debate coverage. Most people should know about this by now, but there's been some question-planting going on again (HT: Pajamas Media), as the retired gay general asking the question about gays in the military was a Clinton staffer.
And, it doesn't stop there.
The thing is, this has to be a world-class embarassment for CNN. I don't really buy into the Vast Left-Wing Media Conspiracy meme, but this is one of those examples that righties will shove in the faces of liberals like me in order to make their case. I read this as systemic, world-class incompetence on the part of CNN. I don't think Anderson Cooper knew, but are you telling me, that after this same problem happened last time, on the same network, that no one in the mothership thought to do a little vetting of the questions, so they wouldn't be embarrased on the air by Bill Bennett, and a handful of righty bloggers? It makes you wonder how you can trust them as a journalistic outfit after this foolishness.
Joe Scarborough calls bullshit as far as CNN not knowing about this beforehand is concerned, but I have problems believing CNN even has the attention span, let alone the smarts to execute such a scheme. Who knows. A half-assed web search could've solved this straightaway. CNN, your internet kung-fu is weak.
This cannot be good for Hillary. One wonders if CNN really is smarter than we think, and they're simply in the tank for Obama?
2 comments:
this is one of those examples that righties will shove in the faces of liberals like me in order to make their case.
Which case? That a couple of the large mainstream media institutions are biased against them? To be honest, I think for CNN and the NYTimes at least, that case has been successfully made long before now, just has it has for Fox on the other side.
Other than that, I don't think this points to much more than the fact that CNN is not a credible news organization, and probably shouldn't be hosting debates (again, any more than Fox should be). It does not (IMHO) say anything at all about Hillary's ethics (that question was asked and answered years ago) or the validity of the liberal platform.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I wrote CNN off as a bunch of partisan hacks for the left years ago, and have always believed Hillary to be no more honest than her husband.
I disagree with some (but by no means all) of the liberal agenda, just as I disagree with a lot of the conservative agenda, but not on the basis of misbehavior by CNN, Fox, or Hillary.
I think the damage from this is minimal. Half the country will think it was just fine, and the other half thinks CNN has been like this all along.
I think the damage from this is minimal. Half the country will think it was just fine, and the other half thinks CNN has been like this all along.
Yeah, you're probably right about that. I had almost forgotten about this story since I first blogged on this a few days ago.
Post a Comment