CNN should just call it "Witch Hunt Watch"
October 02, 2009 11:38 am ET by Eric Boehlert
CNN's Jessica Yellin yesterday did a decent job trying to put the Kevin Jennings "controversy" in context. (See clip below.) But watching the report I couldn't help thinking how strange this new Obama-era news model has become. It used to be that in the past, when leaders from the party out of power had a (partisan) beef with the White House and were willing to spend some political capital to make a stink, the Beltway press paid attention.
Today, with the GOP increasingly irrelevant within the Beltway and the right-wing media, and specifically Fox News, taking over as the Opposition Party, other journalists are now taking their cues in terms of partisan news from radio talk show hosts and cable TV hosts. It's unprecedented.
At what point did CNN during the Bush years, for instance, carve out time to report on what Air America hosts or liberal bloggers were complaining about regarding personnel issues inside the White House? If Democrats big whigs wanted to cause a fuss, they might garner some coverage. But liberal commentators? For most of the Bush years the Beltway press couldn't care less what they had to say, and certainly never saw their comments or attacks as news.
Yet watching CNN's report on the Jennings 'controversy,' it was painfully clear that the GOP Noise Machine has rigged the system. They raise concerns (i.e. they lie and fear monger) about a single passage in a book written 21 years ago by a mid-level White House official and that's news? On what planet does that kind of newsroom math add up?
Weak witch hunts like the one unleashed this week against Jennings only work if the mainstream press acknowledges them. And I'm sorry, but serious journalists need to use a higher, better standard to determine a story's newsworthiness beyond the hollow "conservative are angry about.....," construct that's currently in use. Even if the press sets out to debunk the claims.
As I suggested in the headline, if CNN is going to routinely report out these conservative attacks on members of the administration (which will never, ever end), than CNN ought to at least be upfront about it and start up a running segment called, "Witch Hunt Watch."


















-----------------------------------------------------------------
Liberal media my astreix!
Fever-swamp stuff should not be treated seriously. But fever-swamp stuff promoted by big-name political players should be treated very seriously.
But the story isn't "major conservatives are upset". The story isn't "major conservatives are upset. Liberals responded by saying...". The story isn't "major conservatives are upset, but their claims are undermined by...".
The story is "major conservatives are playing the public for fools again. The latest example is...". And that wouldn't be a liberal story. It would be a centrist news report.
Thank you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL
I agree and will propose the first witch hunt which needs to be put behind us. Please produce Mr. Obama's OFFICAL birth records so he can stop hiding them after having already spent over $1.35M to hide them. His employers want to know what he is hiding!
So please end this witch hunt by providing honest facts on the matter (not just retelling us what we have already been fed).
Don't listen to them about domestic or foreign policy. Don't listen to them about politics. Don't use them for news. This is the internet. There are plenty of sources out there that don't make stuff up.
(This one, for example, couldn't find his @$$ with two hands and a telescope.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
WE HAVE FOUND A WITCH, MAY WE BURN HERE?
BURN HER! BURN HER!
How people like you who are so uneducated and misinformed think that you should be educating us is beyond me!
Years ago my sister got me The Godfather for Xmas. My (staunchly conservative) father wanted me to make him a copy. I'm cool with that, but I first needed to exchange the gift: She got me fullscreen, which I hate, and I wanted the letterbox format. No prob. No biggie. She watches both, I only like letter box, it was a nice gift, so why ruin it by BUYING a second copy and never watching the one she got me? But my DAD, he HATES letterbox. Got all annoyed when I wanted to make the exchange. And THIS was the best he could do: "If you asked 9 out 10 people, I bet none of them would say the prefer letterbox!"
Now... putting aside that this is laughably inaccurate - Netflix, for example, carries letterbox exclusively for this very reason - I found it very revealing about how he thinks: To believe that he (or someone else) is right, he needs lots of people to agree with him (or them)! To him, the ad populum logical falacy is what passes for REASON!
My answer? That frankly, I don't care what 9 out of 10 people prefer, becuase almost none of them are going to be in MY HOUSE watching MY MOVIES! And I prefer letterbox format!
I run into this a LOT with conservatives. Religious folks are lousy with this kind of nonsensical thinking. That's why no amount of FACTUAL EVIDENCE will ever convince them they're wrong, because they know a whole bunch of people who agree with them! (As if that should count for anything at all!)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know you've left the path of reason when there's actually a NAME for the logical falacy you're using!
I mostly agree with Boehlert's analysis...but would offer a little advice...he should re-read the Lanny Davis article about accuracy and fact checking.
And on the MMFA story about Lanny Davis, your suggestion had all the reliability of a lead balloon and all the insight of a professional dunce. Someone on that thread said that you're turning 'missing the point' into a genuine art form.
But that wasn't Lanny Davis' point, was it? Davis' point was about substantive errors that required apologies. How did you miss that point in Davis' essay and equate that to a simple brain fart by Boehlert in this case?
Go home, man. Have drink, relax, enjoy your weekend and come back when you're ready to trade [rhetorical] blows on SUBSTANTIVE matters.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Typo's. Sheesh.
From ABC on Chicago losing the bid for the Olympics:
Charlie Gibson: "...this is a real, sort of, I guess, kind of, kick in the pants for the President."
Stephanopoulos: "This is just stunning...And this will open the President up to some criticism of those who say what happened to his powers of persuasion."
The only thing stunning is the ignorance of these two assigning some magical powers to Pres.Obama. He performed a presidential act by trying to convince the Olympic committee to grant the bid to Chicago.
They didn't...and I find no blame for Pres.Obama's attempt or the outcome...unlike these two idiots.
I've been wonering for years why it's the only major network (other than Fox) that my parents will watch.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3jt5ibfRzw