CNN suggested Dems' support for writers' strike compromised by media moguls' money
On the November 26 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer suggested Democratic presidential candidates were "trying to have it both ways" by expressing support for the strike by the Writers Guild of America despite having accepted contributions from entertainment executives. During the report itself, general assignment correspondent Kareen Wynter stated: "They're speaking out for writers, but the Democratic front-runners have previously accepted donations from senior executives at some of the very companies the writers are striking against." Wynter added: "[Senator Hillary Rodham] Clinton [D-NY], for example, took $4,600 in June from Peter Chirnen, president of the parent company of the Fox Network and Film Studio. That doesn't mean writers will refuse her support." Neither Blitzer nor Wynter explained their suggestion that Democrats are behaving inconsistently in accepting contributions from studio executives and then supporting the writers' strike.
Additionally, Wynter claimed during her report that the Democratic presidential candidates were supporting the writers for fundraising reasons: "There's no mystery why the Democratic candidates would support the strike. Labor unions are a critical source of fundraising and organization for Democratic presidential campaigns."
From the November 26 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: The Hollywood writers' strike is playing a surprising and growing role in the race for the White House, at least among Democrats, but are some of the candidates trying to have it both ways by cozying up to management while backing labor? CNN's Kareen Wynter is in Los Angeles. Kareen?
WYNTER: Wolf, the pickets are back up but talks are under way today between striking Hollywood writers and representatives for the studios and networks. Now in its fourth week, the strike is drawing the attention of the leading democratic presidential candidates.
[begin video clip]
JOHN EDWARDS (Democratic presidential candidate): I'm proud to be with you in this fight for fairness.
WYNTER: John Edwards on the front lines of the Hollywood writers' strike. He and his fellow Democratic presidential contenders have become increasingly vocal about the labor dispute.
EDWARDS: This is part of the continuing effort to make sure that people who work hard for a living are treated fairly.
WYNTER: Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama [IL] and Governor Bill Richardson [NM] have issued statements supporting writers in their battle with the TV networks and studios, but only Edwards has showed up at a picket line in person.
JAMES DUFF (striking writer): It's really nice when Senator Clinton and Senator Obama send a note expressing support. They've talked the talk. But John Edwards is coming to walk the walk.
WYNTER: Lest anyone doubt Clinton's support for the cause, she's vowed to boycott a CBS News-sponsored debate next month if news writers for that network join the strike.
Obama quickly followed suit, and his wife, Michelle, turned down an invitation to co-host ABC's The View because their writers are on strike.
Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, earlier canceled an appearance on the show. The Writers Guild applauded that.
JACK KENNY (striking writer): I think that people who believe in labor unions shouldn't cross picket lines.
WYNTER: There's no mystery why the Democratic candidates would support the strike. Labor unions are a critical source of fundraising and organization for Democratic presidential campaign.
EDWARDS: Thanks, guys, great to see you.
WYNTER: They're speaking out for writers, but the Democratic front-runners have previously accepted donations from senior executives at some of the very companies the writers are striking against. Clinton, for example, took $4,600 in June from Peter Chirnen, president of the parent company of the Fox Network and Film Studio. That doesn't mean writers will refuse her support.
KENNY: I'm happy to have the endorsements of Senator Clinton and Senator Obama and anybody else who would like to say something.
[end video clip]
WYNTER: Not saying anything are the Republican presidential candidates, neither [sic] of whom have taken a public stand on the strike, for instance, former actor Fred Thompson, who, as a star of the show Law & Order, used to read lines written by members of the Writers Guild. In fact, his Hollywood labor ties include membership with the two largest acting unions. Wolf?
BLITZER: All right, Kareen, thanks very much; Kareen Wynter in L.A.
"They're speaking out for writers, but the Democratic front-runners have previously accepted donations from senior executives at some of the very companies the writers are striking against." ..." Neither Blitzer nor Wynter explained their suggestion that Democrats are behaving inconsistently in accepting contributions from studio executives and then supporting the writers' strike.
The inconsistency needs to be explained? Why did MMfA even touch this..wow.
Dex, Wolf throws out this "are some of the candidates trying to have it both ways by cozying up to management while backing labor?" and then does not really answer the question, nor does the reporter on the street. See, Wolf, by saying that , implies that the democratic candidates are or are not trying to have it both ways. Unless, the follow up interview with the reporter or some other piece of tape is going to answer the question or at least present facts regarding both sides then it is not good journalism to tease with the question in the first place.
Listen to Democracy Now with Amy Goodman if you want to hear some really good journalism some time.
"The inconsistency needs to be explained? Why did MMfA even touch this..wow."
There's no inconsistency. It's a phony issue. You try to explain it, buddy. You can't.
I hope the strike continues and some of them awful shows go away. It's not a Democratic problem like Wolfie states and will be settled soon.
This is a completely phony issue. There's nothing inconsistent or hypocritical about Dems supporting strikers and also taking campaign money from the companies. Politicians are supposed to represent everyone.
With that philosophy, then any money received from business would be unacceptable, if the Dems. support labor.
Jeez!! The ridiculous level of scrutiny and questioning-- and innuendo-- that the Democrats are receiving, as compared to the Republicans-- the bias here is absolutely criminal.
What happen to them not asking gotcha questions? Guess that only applies to Democrats. That didn't last long CNN!
That's pretty slimey to lump Edwards in there with Hillary like that. He showed up to walk the line with the strikers, hasn't taken contributions from the moguls and these "journalists" want to imply that he is the same as the other two Dems who couldn't find the time show up and have accepted donations from management?
That's a cheap shot.
Roundhouse, good point, there was no particular justification for lumping Edwards in.
Sure there was. They want to demonize any Democratic candidate who has any chance in Hell at getting the nomination. THAT'S the reason to include Edwards in.
WYNTER: There's no mystery why the Democratic candidates would support the strike. Labor unions are a critical source of fundraising and organization for Democratic presidential campaign.
Not sure if that is supposed to cast shame on a candidate or something. It should be a badge of honor to support the labor unions who fight corporate corruption and protect American workers and their families from dishonest deals.
Unions, the labor movement and organized workers are the most effective counterweight to corrupt corporate power.
That is so true. Not only MONEY but also VOTES. Labor DELIVERS for Dems. Without it they are in big trouble. To NOT support labor action would be political suicide for the Democratic Party
All right, another possible wedge issue. Of small substance,but usable to flog a few democratic candidates with. Wynter did bring up Thompson and the repub candidates silience at the end. Wolfie could have gained a little credibility by spending some time on them.
Well, since the Repub candidates (to my knowledge) are not getting campaign contributions from the moguls, what do they have to answer for?
Especially on this strike in particular...I think the general public is very split on it.
The whole republican noise machine is backed by mogul power. Every time they gush over a republican or diss a democrat, it is a free campaign contribution. Murdock isn't the only one with ties and power in the national media.
I think their positions on the issue is as worthy of air time as the democratic positions.
Damned strike. Heroes is being cut down prematurely (and poorly) because of it.
PAY YOUR WRITERS, PEOPLE. I don't want season two to completely suck!!
Well, since the Repub candidates (to my knowledge) are not getting campaign contributions from the moguls, what do they have to answer for?
They don't need a campaign contribution from some media moguls, they get:
News Corp which is, Television Fox Broadcasting Company Fox Television Stations WNYW - New York City WWOR - New York City KTTV - Los Angeles KCOP - Los Angeles WFLD - Chicago WPWR - Chicago KMSP - Minneapolis WFTC - Minneapolis WTXF - Philadelphia WFXT - Boston WTTG - Washington D.C. WDCA - Washington D.C. KDFW - Dallas KDFI - Dallas WJBK - Detroit KUTP - Phoenix KSAZ - Phoenix WUTB - Baltimore WRBW - Orlando WOFL - Orlando WOGX - Ocala WAGA - Atlanta KRIV - Houston KTXH - Houston WJW - Cleveland WTVT - Tampa KDVR - Denver KTVI - St. Louis WITI - Milwaukee WDAF - Kansas City KSTU - Salt Lake City WHBQ - Memphis WGHP - Greensboro WBRC - Birmingham KTBC - Austin DBS & Cable FOXTEL BSkyB Star DirecTV Sky Italia Fox News Channel Fox Movie Channel FX FUELNational Geographic Channel SPEED Channel Fox Sports Net FSN New England (50%) FSN Ohio FSN Florida National Advertising Partners Fox College Sports Fox Soccer Channel Stats, Inc. Film 20th Century Fox Fox Searchlight Pictures Fox Television Studios Blue Sky Studios Newspapers United States New York Post United Kingdom News International News of the World The Sun The Sunday Times The Times Australia Daily Telegraph Fiji Times Gold Coast Bulletin Herald Sun Newsphotos Newspix Newstext NT News Post-Courier Sunday Herald Sun Sunday Mail Sunday Tasmanian Sunday Territorian Sunday Times The Advertiser The Australian The Courier-Mail The Mercury The Sunday Telegraph Weekly Times Magazines InsideOut donna hay SmartSource The Weekly Standard TV Guide (partial) Books HarperMorrow Publishers HarperMorrow General Books Group Access Amistad Caedmon Avon Ecco Eos Fourth Estate HarperAudio HarperBusiness HarperCollins Harper Design International HarperEntertainment HarperLargePrint HarperResource HarperSanFrancisco HarperTorch Perennial PerfectBound Quill Rayo ReganBooks William Morrow William Morrow Cookbooks Children's Books Group Avon Greenwillow Books Joanna Cotler Books Eos Laura Geringer Books HarperAudio HarperCollins Children's Books HarperFestival HarperTempest Katherine Tegen Books Trophy Zondervan HarperCollins UK HarperCollins Canada HarperCollins Australia Other Los Angeles Kings (NHL, 40% option) Los Angeles Lakers (NBA, 9.8% option) Staples Center (40% owned by Fox/Liberty) News Interactive Fox Sports Radio Network Sky Radio Denmark Sky Radio Germany Broadsystem Classic FM Festival Records Fox Interactive IGN Entertainment Mushroom Records MySpace.com National Rugby League NDS News Outdoor Nursery World Scout Media
365 days a year, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Who needs contributions.
Ummm.... Contrary to Wolf's "analysis," doesn't the fact that Democratic candidates are supporting the striking workers, even though having accepted campaign donations from those being struck, demonstrate that the Democratic candidates are not allowing the money to dictate their positions?
Shouldn't this be lauded as good and proper behavior?
Gotta love the media creating a controversy where there should have been praise for the Dem candidates -- and a reminder that this behavior is contrary to everything we've seen from the K-Street Republicans since 1994.