| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > TV News Corner > Topic: CNN/Hillary plant... |
Topic: CNN/Hillary plant...
| Author | Message |
| LikestheNumbers | Posted – 11/29/2007 2:40:28 AM | show profile Keith Kerr At first, I was really disappointed that this happened, especially that it was a person associated with Clinton's campaign (sometimes these things write themselves), but then I looked back at the question... it didn't help her campaign at all. This was an honest-to-god person asking a question and while he definately had some deep ties (that will be more of the story than his actual question), he was trying to get an answer and I wish they had done it. I've read a few places that he is actually a Log Cabin Republican, but that will be quickly lost in the push to make this story about Hillary Clinton and planting questions. I definately think this story will continue to expand the narrative against CNN and not help it gain any ground against MSNBC/FNC. You kind of wonder how this could happen, and I hate to agree with some conspiracy nuts that say CNN probably knew and chose to let it ride. CNN needed a really nice, fun, energetic debate to help prop up the evening and instead it will be branded a Clinton propaganda tool (which I don't think reasonable people think is the actual case). One last thing, what American boos a retired General? Honestly. |
| chucho | Posted – 11/29/2007 9:12:56 AM | show profile 99% of all television journalism sucks. Here's an example of CNN suckiness from my own experience: I am involved with the coverage of that ridiculous rape case story in Saudi Arabia. The woman I edit who has broken a few elements in the case has been on CNN twice. Yesterday they interviewed her live. The first question the anchor asked: "How do feel about the ruling?" WTF kind of question is that? It's exactly what television journalism does: asks questions specifically to illicit emotional responses. The reporter was so pissed that a chunk of her two minutes of air time would be wasted saying the obvious and CNN specifically asked this question because they want the source to express outrage instead of explaining actual details in this trial. I told her she shoudl have walked off the set, or at least responded by says "Well, what do YOU think about the ruling, you vapid bitch?" Teevee journalism -- whether it's CNN, MSNBC or FNS -- is the crappiest place to try to get an understanding of a story, any story. I just happen to think there are DEGREES of shitty journalism (99% is shitty, but some is shittier than others) and I happen to fairly beleive that FNS is the worst offender. For example: when I was watching the Califrnia wildfire coverage, FNS kept repeating an "emotional report" where the reporter simply kept "marveling" at the fact that one house is burned to the ground while another next door didn't get any damage. (Isn't that almost a cliche when covering iasters anyway? To marvel at the fate of damage here but no damage nearby? You see that shit all the time in tornado coverage!) FNS ran that SAME crappy non-informative report for hours and hours. Meanwhile at CNN they were actually developing the story, in one segment reporting that 5,000 insurance clams had already submitted (while FNS was simply repeating that vapid fatalist segment over and over again). So while I think CNN sucks, it doesn't come the low and sad level of suckiness as FNS. That's my opinion and I'm sticking by it with concrete evidence and examples. PS: Does that mean I'm defending CNN? No. It doesn't. Fuck YouTube and fuck YouTube debates. If anyone gave a crap about debates they'd be calling for the FCC to FORCE the regular networks to give up some of that PUBLIC AIRWAVES THAT THEY RENT FROM THE PEOPLE for a weekly IMPROMPTU and IMPROVISED question-and-answer session with candidates fielding random questions from people sitting in the same room with them so that the voters could see how they react to unexpected questions instead of pre-scripted crap. . .with the candidates moderated not by cults of personality (Andersen Cooper is a shitty celebri-journo, period) but rather the League of Women Voters like they used to do it. Any if FrankLobo actually cared about the subject he brought up he'd agree with me, but we all know this is part of his broken record, FNS-defense crusade. |
| chucho | Posted – 11/29/2007 11:24:07 AM | show profile Oh, so you agree that the FCC should "REG'LATE" the networks and order them to provide FREE air time for weekly improvised debates ? YES or NO. You are part of (or have been consistently defending) the "drown the government" crowd and as such you don't beleive the government should impede on "the private sector" ergo you don't think the FCC should even exist, otherwise you wouldn't support the people who have been paramount in the deregulation and consolidation of the media that has caused television journalism to go down the toilet in the first place. (Let's start with your hero Ronald Reagan, shall we? He killed the fairness doctrine that opened the way for the right-wing opinionista peanut gallery to dominate radio and cable news, which, as I said, is PUBLIC PROPERTY, and is not suppose dto be the Corporatist Propaganda Network that characterizes 99% of all television news. Of course CNN endorses Hilary Clinton just as much as Fox endorses whomever the Republicans field against her! THEY ON THE SAME FUCKING SIDE! Don't you realize that? Both sides get checks from the same corporate entities (See who Citibank gives money to, for example) and from the perspective of foreign policy: neo-conservatism rips down nations and neo-liberalism builds them up in the image of America. Why don't Americans -- liberal and conservatives alike -- see that process?) And I don't beleive that you brought this issue up as a matter of how campaigns are run. Nor have you -- I should point out -- ever offered any SOLUTIONS to the problems you bring up. You just whine sarcastically like you've gotten all your debating tips form Anne Coulter columns. You brought it up to say "CNN bad" as part of your ridiculous FNS booster "bug up your ass about Olberman" crusade. Nobody buys this bullshit anymore. I certainly do not. |
| chucho | Posted – 11/29/2007 11:27:09 AM | show profile And, by the way, let's address the white elephant in the room: do you not think that the Republicans are just as guilty of manipulating and controlling forums like this. Are you blind, stupid or dishonest? Which is it? I haven't tossed my chips behind anyone. You're the one whose motives and politics are incredibly obvious, which means you actually have a stake in this that I do not. |
| JIMBO99 | Posted – 11/29/2007 12:12:50 PM | show profile ????????????????????? "Do you not think that the Republicans are just as guilty of manipulating and controlling forums like this?" Ummm,can ya give us an example Lib? |
| Iron Eagle | Posted – 11/29/2007 12:38:55 PM | show profile Do you toeheads ever take a break from the persistent vomiting. I guess you savor the tase of your own gut mucus. |
| chucho | Posted – 11/29/2007 1:22:29 PM | show profile >> "Republicans are just as guilty of manipulating and controlling forums like this?" << Are you seriously going to tell me that at Republican events everyone is allowed to come at will and speak their minds and ask anything they want? Is that what you're saying? Because there are plenty of news stories out there of, for example, Bush only attending closed and scripted events. Again, I'm not here to defend CNN's action -- and I am discussing the matter of scripted events where softball questions are lobbed at the leaders. And frankly I think Hillary would be a bad president (not as bad as Guiliani, but still). But if you're seriously going to argue that Democrats script their events and Republican events are open to unfettered discussion and they don't plant audience members to lob softball questions, then obviously you haven't watched any event President Bush has spoken at in the past year. So my point is there's plenty of this pre-scripted shit going on both sides of the poltical aisle. But as far as the debates are concerned, I certainly agree that CNN did a stupid thing and that the Democrat Party is playing the same dirty tricks that the GOP does so much better. But, please, don't try to tell me that the Republicans don't script their events, OK? Because even you don't believe that. You want evidence, get out your Google and start reading stories about how Bush only goes to events with supporters and that attendees are screened to weed out the opposition, etc. It's all over the place. Do your own research instead of watching BOR all the time. |
| chucho | Posted – 11/29/2007 2:15:27 PM | show profile Again, let me be clear that I am not defending CNN, Andersen Cooper or Hillary Clinton. What annoys me is the sanctimony by which conservatives react to things without ever confronting the dirty tricks played on their side of the aisle, in this case: participating in these highly scripted and controlled media clown shows. How is having a former Republican congressmen (Joe Scarborough) lobbing softball questions at Republican candidates any better? The problem with this self-righteous attitude (the blaring Drudge Report headlines, the elitist condescension of right wing conservatives that live in mansions in Connecticut and would think about walking into a Home Depot in Ohio unless it was for a photo op is that it's just as bad as anythign that can be lobbed at elitist liberals that do the same thing and accept the same payola from the same special interest groups. The whole process, IMO, is beyond redemption. And as I said, my chips aren't behind anyone and I'm not the one waving partisan banners here. |
| chucho | Posted – 11/29/2007 2:24:23 PM | show profile OMG I'm actually losing my eyes on the ball here: It just occurred to me to ask why CNN was pre-screening the people anyway?? What's the big deal about somebody affiliated with any party asking any question he or she wants? Is this what this clown show has become: a media conglomerate pre-screening citizens and asking them irrelevant questions? What? Are members of Y party not allowed to ask questions at X party debates. Is that fucking stupid? It's amazing how core philosophical questions (can a Democrat ask a question at a Republican debate and vice versa) get lost amid the white noise of partisan bull-shit-ery. If we had open, non-scripted debates that are open to all (you know, like it use to happen) this wouldn't be an issue. And you can't blame that on any party. If anything, the American people themselves are to blame for putting up with this horse shit. I think the League of Women's Voters should storm the halls of these debates and publicly hang Joe Scarborough AND Andersen Cooper (and BOR and OLBY for that matter) and commandeer these debates and bring them back to earth. |
| JIMBO99 | Posted – 11/29/2007 3:53:02 PM | show profile Well said Frank....and another thing.... What would the MSM be talking about this AM if it had been the Dems debating on FOXNEWS and one of the questioners said...."This question is for Clinton" |
| TruthOut | Posted – 11/29/2007 5:05:46 PM | show profile The Dems already had their You Tube debate. Funny, I don't seem to remember any Republican "plants" in the audience. Can you imagine the outrage had that happened? But Democratic plants in a Republican debate? No problem at all say the apologists. |
| Olbypocrisy | Posted – 11/30/2007 2:30:28 PM | show profile chucho are you sick of your self also???? chucho---The problem with this self-righteous attitude (the blaring Drudge Report headlines, the elitist condescension of right wing conservatives that live in mansions in Connecticut and would think about walking into a Home Depot in Ohio unless it was for a photo op is that it's just as bad as anythign that can be lobbed at elitist liberals that do the same thing and accept the same payola from the same special interest groups. The whole process, IMO, is beyond redemption. chucho on 11/27/07 You're just fun to play with on this board while I'm making more money than you and blissfully living outside of your world looking in.) |
