Yes, we tuned into CNN Thursday night to see how Kamala Harris and Tim Walz did in their first interview after the Democratic National Convention. Because the interview had been ballyhooed into an Event of Significance. My wife and I wanted to see how they did.
What we got was CNN triviality interspersed with bald attempts to catch the pair in a contradiction. What did Harris think when Trump said she wasn't Black? Didn't Walz once say he had carried a weapon during wartime? What about that cool photo the New York Times took of one of Harris's nieces watching her speak? What about Gus Walz crying?
All deflected away more or less deftly — more by Harris, the former prosecutor, less by Walz, the former football coach. The next morning WBBM prominently aired the quote where Harris squelched the "changed race" gambit with "next question." Emotion over substance. So what was all that blustering about "policy" about? Isn't not being a traitor policy aplenty? We can hash out their position on the Law of the Sea later.
What we got was CNN triviality interspersed with bald attempts to catch the pair in a contradiction. What did Harris think when Trump said she wasn't Black? Didn't Walz once say he had carried a weapon during wartime? What about that cool photo the New York Times took of one of Harris's nieces watching her speak? What about Gus Walz crying?
All deflected away more or less deftly — more by Harris, the former prosecutor, less by Walz, the former football coach. The next morning WBBM prominently aired the quote where Harris squelched the "changed race" gambit with "next question." Emotion over substance. So what was all that blustering about "policy" about? Isn't not being a traitor policy aplenty? We can hash out their position on the Law of the Sea later.
The bottom line that keeps drifting out of sight for the major media is this: they're running against Donald Trump. The liar, bully, fraud and traitor. Convicted felon. Who led an insurrection against the country and will do so again, given the opportunity. Who cares what Harris said about fracking in 2020? Who could possibly care? CNN apparently. It's like the old joke where the flight attendant pushes the cart down the aisle and says, "For dinner, we have chicken, or shit mixed with broken glass" and the passenger replies, "How is the chicken prepared?"
I gave up on CNN a long time ago, but I thought I'd tune in anyway, to see how they handled the fastballs and the curveballs in interview situations. And if people were discussing it online, I wanted to be able to agree or disagree with them. Which would have been hard to do if I didn't watch .
ReplyDeleteBut the more I saw, the more pissed and disgusted I became. CNN was trying to trip them up from the start, and catch them in some kind of unintentional "Joe moment" and make them look ridiculous about minutiae. Thus feeding Trump more ammo. The' service record. Fracking. How did you FEEL when...blah blah blah. Gimme a break. Impartiality, my ass...
When a talking head did his wrap-up, and actually said: "If I were the Trump team, I'd be salivating right about now, after what they said." I lost it. Cursed at the screen and reached for the remote. Which side are you on, boy? No question about it. CNN is now Fox Lite, and everybody knows it. What a disappointment. What a waste. And were any people on any blue pages and sites talking about the show? Nope. Not a peep. I want my fifty minutes back.
I am truly mystified by the way Dana Bash conducted the interview. The questions were just dumb and inconsequential! And this approach of conducting a “tough” interview to “expose” people to see what they’re made of or not, seems so based on attitudes of mistrust and trying to bring out the worst in people. What’s the point? Why not ask substantive questions to which candidates can reply and the audience will judge what they’re made of? And Scott Jennings on CNN? Why? It’s not that he’s a Republican; it’s that he’s so lacking in intelligence! Is CNN under new leadership that has lost site of what’s at stake with this election? I don’t get it. And I no longer know where to go to watch the news — NewsNation? MSNBC? Neil, can you help us out and bring your keen intellect and in-depth research skills to explain what is happening at CNN? They seem to be in a noticeable decline.
ReplyDeleteMaybe they're not in decline so much as we forgot how crappy they are. Look at this post from 10 years ago about CNN's astoundingly bad coverage of that missing Malaysian airliner: https://www.everygoddamnday.com/2014/04/the-search-for-cnns-missing-reputation.html
DeleteYou knocked it out of the park that time, Mr. S. It was a few years before i came to EGD. They kept pre-empting scheduled programming, constantly, with crash "coverage". Especially when two excellent "historical documentaries" were scheduled..."The Eighties"...and later "The Nineties." They never did show the episode about AIDS, and I believe that was deliberate.
DeleteAs the charade continued over the weeks and months, I became more and more pissed...hell, enraged...when they would replace those shows with still more Flight 370 crap. I began calling CNN the "Crash News Network"...and 2014 was about the time I blew them off entirely. Looks like they've only gotten worse over the last decade.
the "elephant" in the room that you all are ignoring is that ALL political reporters are as shallow and intellectually dishonest. just look at today's NYT, one full page of snide recap and clearly hinted at sadness that the 2 dem didn't step on their (ahem, metaphorical) dicks. the overwhelming majority of the national political press is filled with rank assholes.
DeleteThe Media in general and CNN in particular have a lot to answer for. Why are they trying to elect TFG? Usually responsible journalists are falling all over themselves to "catch" Harris or Walz saying something contradictory. Do they not get that opinions change and positions evolve? Why do they never hold TFG to the same .. or any .. standard? They continue to treat this election as if it were the same as previous elections when it clearly is not..
ReplyDeletehe makes better copy, all they care about is their lick bait
DeleteThis is why I don't watch news broadcasts.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe there's a single mainstream news organization that is covering the real news and issues of this election (or, frankly, of the past several elections). It seems to me the story is being handed to journalists on a silver platter but they just can't figure it out (or aren't allowed to figure it out by their owners-with-an-agenda?). I find my political "news" these days primarily in blogs, commentary pieces, and non-traditional publications that point out stark differences in governing, historical and factual information that shows just how badly things could turn out, and details that should be in front page headlines or top of broadcasts but instead are buried deep inside or never see the light of day in print or broadcast. But how many people in this country know where to look or even can discern that what they're being fed in mainstream news often is at best useless and irrelevant or at worst making them believe that they really need to know how the chicken is prepared rather than understanding the choice, for god's sake!, is between chicken-doesn't-matter-how-it's-prepared or shit mixed with broken glass?
ReplyDeleteAmen, sister. Substack, and other platforms where truly independent thinkers (like our host Neil), are the ONLY place I get my news.
Deletethe only place? well to each their own mike. I prefer several legacy news outlets, where there continues to be reporting and not mainly opinion. coverage of the events and interaction with news makers is very important as are editors and standards and best practices.
Deleteno news source is infallible but if you are discerning you can find facts. not just listen to others points of view. both realms are important in order to understand what's happening
Sadly CNN is becoming what it’s nickname used to be. Chicken Noodle News. Rarely ever tune in anymore on purpose though occasionally stop by if flipping through channels. Rarely stay.
ReplyDeleteI also wish Harris had refused to debate TFG. She had a chance to stick the shiv into this tired media relic. You can't debate Trump. Every debate opponent going back to 2016 was going to wipe the floor with him, but that's not how it worked out. You can't debate a psychotic, ignorant, evil man.
DeleteThe idea that an open mike will catch Trump saying a no-no is ludicrous. He'll firehose a stream of lies and bullshit and suffer no consequence. If Harris mispronounces one word, the media blob will jump all over that and question her fitness for office while declaring him the "winner."
I actually think the debate in 2020 helped Biden. Trump was such an obnoxious bully he wouldn’t even let Biden get a word in. When Biden would look in the camera as if to say, you believe this fu——-g guy? I think it turned a lot of undecided voters against Trump and helped put Biden over the top.
DeleteMost thinking Americans expect a modicum of civility in a Presidential debate. Trump is incapable of that. If Harris takes the high ground she will win. America needs to see the side by side contrast of a young, attractive, professional Stateswoman, against a haggard, crazy con artist.
I say leave the mics open and let him rant. Even moderate Republicans will be saying, good god, why didn’t we nominate Nikki Haley.
Well said, James.
DeleteJames Fallows recently said that at this point the media blob (he was referring to WAPO) are trolling us. I am so glad that Harris is keeping them at arm's length.
ReplyDeleteBefore this interview there was so much noise about how Harris had not done an interview. I think the choice by her campaign to grant the first one to CNN was a good strategy.
ReplyDeleteThey wanted to deflect criticism from their opponents to the largest degree possible. So they didn't go to the most reliable, dependable, trusted news outlet or interviewer and they counted on her and walz to continue doing the excellent job of not sticking their foot in their mouth. .
And let's be honest. Kamala has been doing a lot better than just not embarrassing herself. She's really come up to this candidacy and presents as reasonable, Sensible, trustworthy and if I can say presidential. Before she seized the reigns of her candidacy, I was against her Being the nominee, my mind is completely changed. And it's not just a carryover from anybody but Joe so far she's been terrific. Well hello Nala
I'm sure they're going to do other interviews soon. And continue to kind of keep their head down and let Trump be Trump and make himself look bad over and over .
So far the Harris campaign is pretty impressive. Hopefully she can keep this up all the way to election day and the orange one will fade into history.
It's come to the point that we now have an actual prosecutor running against an actual convicted felon. And most of the proud members of the Law and Order Party are all in for the felon, who, if he were a regular citizen, would be in prison for any of multiple crimes.
ReplyDelete"Isn't not being a traitor policy aplenty?" You'd think the proponents of discerning the "original intent" of the framers of the Constitution would think so.
Like you, NS, I hardly ever watch cable news, or any TV news, for that matter. I didn't make an exception for this and I'm glad I didn't.
I find that the coverage on CNN.com (the website) to be clear and factual; in particular, their fact-checking of claims by either side seems thorough and with documented sources. So, there's that.
ReplyDeleteWhen we get to CNN the network, and in particular that interview, it was a very different story. I was looking forward to that interview, but it disappointed me on several counts.
First off, it wasn't live or uninterrupted as I had expected. Instead we got a chopped-up and padded recorded interview instead, with way too many commercial breaks that would be preceded by a long teaser of what they would be saying in the next segment, followed by a series of commercials, followed by another showing of the preceding teaser after the question was finally asked.
This stop-start jerkiness didn't help anything. Better to just broadcast the interview at whatever time the candidates would be available, in its entirety (thus removing any out-of-context complaints later on), and then blather about it later to your heart's content.
It became painfully obvious after the first couple of segments that they were trying to pad out what was apparently an unexpectedly short interview, one that was going to run way short of its allotted Prime Time slot, an attempt to jam a 27-minute program into a 60-minute pot. I was expecting much more.
The chopped and diced treatment of the interview was my biggest complaint, too, Andy.
DeleteThe mostly negative reviews of the CNN interview last night fortifies my opinion that the Harris/Walz team should refuse to debate Trump, as Joe Biden should have as well. Sure they can show the world that they're smarter, better informed and more competent than Trump/Vance. Such proof will not impress the Trumpists and will not energize the Democratic faithful. Hillary Clinton proved that she was tons smarter, much better informed and certainly blessed with far more experience government-wise than Trump/Pence. Trump disposed of her qualities by calling her a "nasty woman." Game over. Likewise, the Trumpists will give Harris/Walz no credit for a showing of technical superiority, quite the contrary, and staunch Republicans will overcome their disdain for Trump by pointing to his promises to implement the traditional Republican virtues of tax cutting and ostentatious moralizing. So, why bother? I think we're lucky that we have a smart Black woman as the candidate (probably the only way she gets the chance), but to tell the truth, I would have preferred a demented Joe Biden to a cunning Donald Trump any day.
ReplyDeletejohn
Bitter Scribe
ReplyDeleteI think CNN's ninny-like approach is due at least in part to how the rhetorical well has been poisoned lately. Not just by Trump, but by his supporters.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to present yourself as an upright, moral person, and you seek to justify your support of a pig like Trump, pretty much the only option left by this time is to keep calling the alternative -- beyond all evidence -- worse.
As Trump's words and actions get more and more outrageous and inexcusable, his supporters have to keep upping the ante right along to attribute even worse behavior/motives/whatever to the other side. If Trump is disgusting, Harris is more disgusting. If Trump is an incipient dictator, then Harris will be Stalin. Etc. It just keeps spiraling, in what a writer for the Atlantic called "a massive and panicky case of projection."
Then "mainstream" reporters like that CNN woman feel compelled to "address" the nonsensical slander, and the cycle goes on. Lather, rinse, repeat. It's depressing.
BTW, Neil, I do believe I sent a "comment" consisting of just my name by mistake. Please delete, sorry and thank you.
N.S., I was so glad to read your comments because I was worried that I was the only one who was totally enraged by the CNN "interview"...NO....make that "grilling". Like many others I've come to greatly appreciate what Harris and Walz have to say and how they have conducted themselves with dignity, intelligence and purpose. As for Dana Bash, she certainly lived up to her name by unceremoniously bashing the candidates rather than asking meaningful questions.
ReplyDeleteMy neighbor asked me to watch the ballyhooed program with her. When Bash asked Kamala what she meant by her slogan "We Won't Go Back", she threw a grenade into the question by implying that the economy was better before Biden. Although Kamala took the bait, she gave a very thoughtful answer. I tried to listen objectively for the next ten minutes, but Dana Bash was so stupid and determined to skew the answers, I grabbed my glass of bourbon and went home.
Let's hope the Sept. 10 debate gives all Americans a better and more enlightened chance to see that there is only one choice in November. AND IT IS NOT THE DEMENTED CRIMINAL WHO LIES WITH EVERY BREATH HE TAKES.
Seems like only MSNBC can be trusted these days.
ReplyDeleteFor everyone here that is so outraged about the line of questioning in the interview, what exactly was Bash supposed to have asked? “So, Madame Vice President, are you a Beatles or Elvis kind of gal?”, “Governor, whom do you postulate that Carly Simon was singing about when she wrote You’re So Vain?”, “Now, Vice President Harris, we’re all in suspense: what is your favorite Taylor Swift tune?”, “Governor Walz, do you agree that Milton Berle was the King of Television, or do you think that Sid Caesar might have a claim?”, “Toilet paper on the spool: over the top or under?”.
ReplyDeleteAll of you seem to be indignant that Harris and Walz were challenged at all. You seem to think, apparently, that they’re such a couple of cream puffs that they can’t handle a couple of slightly loaded questions from some cable news reporter, which would kind of be cause for concern if American democracy is truly on the line and it is they who are to prevent its downfall. I’ve been less than enthusiastic about the choice of Harris, but I don’t hold her in that low esteem. The questions were fair, and the candidates did fine.
I wouldn’t say ANY of your comments about DJT were Trumpian. Pretty clear I would say. You are not a fan. And, yes, some of the CNN questions were slightly in the 16” softball league. Keep writing as you will…
ReplyDelete