I have a problem with CNN

[True Dough]

I just watched a panel discussion on Trump's delay in condemning the white supremacists/Nazis.

Among the four panel members was Sara Sidner, who is a reporter with CNN (identified during the panel as a "correspondent" ). CNN is regularly accused by the right of being a mouthpiece for the Dems. Remember "Clinton News Network?"

So here we have a correspondent joining a panel and being invited to give her personal opinions of Trump's conduct. She probably said the least, but she was critical of Trump (no one here would question why).

However, in terms of journalism ethics, I think that taints perceptions of Sidner's future reporting. It gives a platform to the critics who say that CNN employs anti-Trump journalists, that the network is biased. There is no questioning now that Sidner feels Trump acted unacceptably. If she files a political report in the future, the right-wingers would be able to say, "Oh yeah, she openly expressed her disapproval of Trump in the past. She's prejudiced against him."

They have done this with Dana Bash and Jeff Zeleny and others.

Best to leave the political panel to those who aren't trusted to bring us news. Perspectives from David Axelrod, Gloria Borger, Thomas Friedman and others are welcome because they're expected to play the role of "analysts" and not impartial ones, the way reporters should strive to be.

[katmondoo]

1. When I hear a pro Trump I change the channel and scream "dirt bag"

sometimes I smack the TV

[mcar]

2. "Clinton News Network?"

It's the term given to CNN back in the 90s, because of their never ending Clenis chase. It was used by the left to disparage CNN.

[True Dough]

4. Like many aspects of language

it has evolved. While that may have been the connotation in the '90s, it has shifted over the past year or two to a "pro-Clinton" designation.

[mr_liberal]

8. It has not shifted. It has always been used by conservatives going back to Tom Delay

and other conservatives to mean its pro Clinton (Bill Clinton in the 90s) and had a liberal bias as founded by liberal Ted Turner who was married to liberal Jane Fonda.

I just think we should deal in facts and not make stuff up.

[mr_liberal]

5. Bologny

Lets deal with reality and not rewrite history to how we'd like it to be like Winston Smith in 1984.

CNN has often been the subject of allegations of liberal bias. In research conducted by the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University .. "The CNN programming studied tended to cast a negative light on Republican candidates – by a margin of three-to-one.... While Democrats on average tended to have more positive coverage, the trend was skewed by particularly positive coverage of Obama."

Former Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, and MRC founder Brent Bozell, among others, have referred to CNN as the "Clinton News Network".[2] DeLay has also called it the "Communist News Network" In September 2009, a Pew Research Poll showed that Democrats were much more likely than Republicans to rate the network favorably, and Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to see CNN unfavorably. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_controversies

[BannonsLiver]

6. I've heard it used by the right as well.

[True Dough]

10. It is, quite frequently

but these other posters will apparently not acknowledge that and keep referring to the '90s. Coincidentally, CNN has a series called "The '90s." I hope they're tuning in since that decade seems to continue to hold their attention.

[moda253]

7. It has also been called the Communist News Network.

[CatMor]

3. I feel the opposite

I wish more reporters had done it during the campaign. Things might have turned out differently.

[JCanete]

9. I have a problem with CNN but it isn't that. Nothing infuriates me more than a pretense of unbiased

reporting. I'd rather journalists wear their perspectives out in the open, because their world-view colors their reporting anyway, but now its hidden under a sheen of impartiality. CNN has helped to perpetuate the bs about it and news in general having a liberal bias even while it proves daily, the opposite. That's the kind of thing that can happen when people pretend to be impartial observers. People will apply motives anyway, and sometimes they'll be quite the opposite to the reality.

[hunter]

11. Television "news" is bullshit. It's "reality TV."

I'm much happier having abandoned it all, long time ago.

No cable, no satellite, no broadcast, no commercials TV.

I think there's a part of the human mind that is unable to distinguish TV from reality.

[True Dough]

12. Out of curiosity, hunter

What do you use as your sources of news?

I admit that I have CNN on in the background much of the day while I'm working. However, I tend to rely on The Guardian and the BBC, Associated Press and Reuters for much of the world news that I consume with confidence.

[hunter]

13. I can't say I consume any news with confidence.

But written news is generally superior and it's easier to judge biases.

For example, BBC. They're biased toward financial markets, especially City of London financial markets.

Raw Guardian, AP, and Reuters sources have their own biases, but sometimes you have to figure that out on a per article basis.

I also read Deutsche Welle.

[True Dough]

14. I'd never seen the Deutsche Welle website before

I'll take some time to peruse that. Thanks.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

15. Could reporting be turned over to computers somehow (AI)

who will objective and disopinionated? Not quite robots, of course, but people trained to keep their opinions out of their mouths, or body language even, I suppose. These are times where bias among reporters is a dangerous and inappropriate attribute, especially, as you say, when it gives Trump the chance to poke at the reputation of CNN reporterage. Sometimes I forget who is reporting and who is opinioning. Could the people on CNN wear tags with large letters (for those of us with small TV sets) designating them as, for example, O for Opinion-Givers, and R for Reporter, so we could tell if they are okay to be biasing or not. I like my news news, and my opinion opinions, like you.

[True Dough]

16. Nice to hear from an old-school, like-minded individual on this topic!

The problem with CNN right now is that they have blurred the lines so badly that your idea for wearing tags marked with O and R would be changed several times per segment. There are times when the reporters are informing us and mixing in their take on things. The closest thing you'll get to objective news on CNN these days is at the top of the hour.

I do appreciate and agree with many of the analysts they have on the network: Fareed Zakaria, Jake Tapper, Gloria Borger, etc. But when it comes to the news, I just want the straight goods.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

17. My fondest dream is to have all robots

on the news, robots who are programmed to eat only facts and summarize them and spew them out for me slow and straight and simple. Opinions make me nervous. Gloria Borger is my favorite because she has never had an original thought, and original thoughts also make me nervous.