From the September 20 edition of CNN's Reliable Sources:
Loading the player reg...
CNN hosted the second GOP presidential debate at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, CA on September 16, the start of Hispanic Heritage Month. In the run-up to the event, Spanish-language media outlets like Diario Las Américas expressed worry that the debate questions wouldn't focus on issues important to Latinos.
The daily Spanish-language newspaper La Opinión referenced the debate's timing in an article about what to watch for. Writer Pilar Marrero cautioned Latinos to be critical of pandering by GOP candidates with anti-immigrant records and said she hoped that "topics of interest such as education, the economy, healthcare" would be discussed in the debate.
After the debate, Miami-based Diario Las Américas declared that the debate's lack of substance mostly favored Trump, even though his arguments were "not always reasonable" and "sometimes hard to understand," they kept the other candidates on the stage busy responding or reacting. As a result, there were few substantive policy discussion on topics like the economy and unemployment:
Translated from Diario Las Américas:
Last night it took entrepreneur Donald Trump roughly 45 minutes of a debate that lasted over three hours to put all his opponents in his pocket.
His arguments were not always reasonable, sometimes difficult to understand, but sharp enough to silence the rest. "What would you do if China attacked us?" "They are already attacking. We must be strong," he snapped to his contender, Sen. Rand Paul.
But the biggest topics, like the economy, unemployment or immigration, were only lightly approached, and the conclave in the end was reduced to a social gathering of friends. That's why Trump was ecstatic by the end of the debate, organized by CNN at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. "We had fun," said the businessman.
What's hard to understand is whether the audiences were able to grasp and assimilate anything of substance. No candidate offered the Hispanic-American world a solution to their problems that went beyond the promise of deportations and sanctions. [Diario Las Américas, 9/17/15]
During the second GOP presidential candidate debate on September 16, Carly Fiorina falsely claimed that the anti-choice Center for Medical Progress' videos targeting Planned Parenthood contained footage of "a fully formed fetus on the table...while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain." Even though multiple fact checkers subsequently noted that the videos contained no such footage, CNN nevertheless rated the false claim as "true, but misleading."
Media outlets gave Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina glowing reviews for her answer to a question about defunding Planned Parenthood during the second GOP debate on September 16. But this praise ignores the fact that Fiorina's attack on Planned Parenthood was based on a fictitious scene from a series of deceptively-edited videos and no such footage exists.
CNN host and Chief Washington Correspondent Jake Tapper used the term "illegal immigrants" during the network's September 16 Republican presidential debate, in violation of the network's own guidelines and despite the advice of immigration and Hispanic journalists' advocacy organizations that have called on the network to discontinue the use of term.
Tapper used the term "illegal immigrants" while posing a question to 2016 GOP presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson, saying, "I want to bring in Dr. Carson because he too has been skeptical of your plan to immediately deport 11 to 12 million illegal immigrants," in allusion to Donald Trump's immigration proposal.
Prior to the debate, CNN's Vice President of Diversity Geraldine Morida asserted, "The word illegal alone should never be used as a standalone noun to refer to individuals with documented or undocumented immigration status." Morida's assertion was in response to the September 14 joint statement from the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ) and immigration advocacy organization Define American calling on CNN to "modernize and improve the accuracy of its editorial guidelines and discontinue the use of the word 'illegal' when referring to undocumented immigrants."
Morida's response is also in line with the Associated Press Stylebook which advises the term "illegal" only be used when referring to an action, not a person.
Derogatory terms like "illegal" and "alien" are frequently used by conservative politicians and media outlets like Fox News to describe undocumented immigrants despite calls to discontinue use of the term.
Last month, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law a measure that will remove the word "alien" from the state's labor code due to concerns that its usage "dehumanizes the people affected," and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin questioned The New Yorker's use of the term in an August 5 column, concluding, "There does seem to be a consensus against the use of the term by the people most affected by it, who happen to be a vulnerable minority seeking a better life, and that's good enough for me. Personally, I'm dropping the use of the term 'illegal immigrant.'"
Conservative pundit Ann Coulter posted a derogatory attack on Jewish Americans in response to mentions of Israel during the second Republican presidential debate.
Cruz, Huckabee Rubio all mentioned ISRAEL in their response to: "What will AMERICA look like after you are president."-- Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) September 17, 2015
How many f
ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?-- Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) September 17, 2015
Coulter has previously asserted that "we" Christians "just want Jews to be perfected ... That's what Christianity is," during a 2007 interview with Donny Deutsch on CNBC's The Big Idea.
UPDATE: In a September 17 interview, Ann Coulter told The Daily Beast "she didn't mean to say that Jews were hoarding influence in this country," and the controversy surrounding her inflammatory tweet "was all based on a misunderstanding." Coulter asserted "'I'm accusing Republicans of thinking the Jews have so much power. They're the ones who are comedically acting out this play where Jews control everything.'" The Daily Beast's Jay Michaelson pushed back, noting "if Coulter's point was to criticize Republican candidates pandering to Israel ... isn't it still problematic to say that a group of politicians think Jews have too much power?" to which Coulter responded, "this episode is not going a long way to disprove that." Michaelson concluded by pointing out "even if asking how many fucking Jews there are isn't, itself, anti-Semitic, it sure stirred up a lot of Republicans who are."
CNN will host the second GOP presidential primary debate tonight, September 16. The network has an inconsistent track record on how it has covered GOP candidates' stances on climate change -- debate host Jake Tapper has fact-checked candidates' climate denial, but the network's coverage of the issue has been problematic at times. Here are the good, the bad, and the ugly ways CNN has covered the GOP presidential candidates' positions on climate change so far this year.
After withering criticism from right-wing media figures, conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt now says that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump "legitimately misunderstood" the foreign policy questions Hewitt asked him during a recent interview, which he initially defended as "fair." Hewitt's backtracking comes just before the second Republican presidential debate, at which Hewitt will join a question-and-answer session that he insists will not be affected by the blowback from his interview with Trump.
Media Matters analyzed cable news coverage of economic issues during the first half of 2015 on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC, and found that appearances by racial and ethnic minority guests in related segments amounted to less than a quarter of all guest appearances.
From the September 14 edition of CNN's CNN Tonight with Don Lemon:
Loading the player reg...
CNN's Jake Tapper called out Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker for claiming to be able to take on special interests, pointing out Walker's ties to "Republican special interests like the Koch brothers."
During a September 13 interview on CNN's State of the Union, Tapper questioned Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's (R) claim that he "can take on special interests" by pointing out Walker's close ties to the billionaire conservative Koch brothers (emphasis added):
GOV. SCOTT WALKER: If you want someone who will fight and win, not just win three elections in four years in a blue state like we did, but win and get results without compromising common-sense conservative principles, then I'm the candidate. I've shown I can take on those same powerful special interests. They spent in three elections almost $100 million dollars trying to take me out, it was the big government union bosses and the liberal special interests in Washington.
JAKE TAPPER: I respect that you've taken on Democratic special interests in Wisconsin, but you've been backed by Republican special interests like the Koch brothers, right? How does that square with what you're saying about taking on special interests or do you think only liberal special interests are the ones worth taking on?
WALKER: I'm taking on the ones in Washington. In my state I didn't just take on the unions and Democrats, early on there was great support from the assembly and some from the Senate, people like State Senator Scott Fitzgerald, but there were some senators, including some who'd been in the leadership, who didn't want to do the kind of reforms. I'm willing to take on anyone. I stood up to 100,000 protesters, I took on the death threats, I took on threats [on] my family. We pushed back when they took us to federal and state court, we pushed back when they went after our state senators. They went after me in a recall election and we won, and they made me the number one target in America, number one in America last year.
TAPPER: But aren't the Koch brothers special interests too? Can you give me an example of one time that you took on a conservative special interest?
WALKER: I tell you flat out, when I took on the $100 million dollars or so, I raised $80 million dollars in three elections in four-and-a-half years, and 70 percent of it came from people who gave me $75 dollars or less. We raised it from more than 300,000 donors in all 50 states, that's grassroots, that's not allegiance to one group or another.
Tapper touched on the nexus between Walker and Charles and David Koch, which is evidenced by the millions of dollars the Kochs directly and indirectly donated to Walker's gubernatorial campaign. A right-to-work bill signed by Walker was nearly a word-for-word replica of model legislation crafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), an organization that receives large sums of money from the Koch brothers. Americans For Prosperity (AFP), a Koch-funded group, "deployed hundreds of volunteers" to help spread Walker's message while buying television and digital ads. And in January, Walker was one of only four GOP presidential hopefuls invited to attend an exclusive Koch brothers' event featuring wealthy conservative political donors.
From the September 10 edition of CNN's CNN Tonight:
Loading the player reg...
Media outlets reported on congressional Republicans' plan to delay implementation of the landmark nuclear agreement with Iran by alleging President Obama inappropriately failed to provide details of the "side deals" between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to Congress. But those outlets failed to note that the IAEA deal with Iran is confidential, which is "standard operating procedure" for agreements of this type.
From the September 10 edition of CNN's New Day:
Loading the player reg...
A Media Matters analysis of the Sunday morning political talk shows found a plurality of the guests hosted to discuss the Iran nuclear agreement since it was announced in July opposed the deal. Notably, 63 percent of guests hosted on Fox News Sunday to discuss the deal opposed it, while only 13 percent supported it.