Bias in the media? No way!

Leave a Reply

Comment as a guest.
Avatar

  1. Polimom,
    My initial response to this was: What took them so long? As I thought longer about it, oh… about 15 seconds or so, I ended up where you are about doing “the right thing.”
    Not to worry, Dana Bash and Suzanne Malveaux will now get even more partisan by way of compensation. Or… CNN can hire Dede Myers, who I see making the rounds on the talking heads circuit.

  2. Polimom,
    I’ve read (repeatedly and everywhere) that this “decision” was pretty much forced upon CNN by the Obama camp.
    Will CNN “…make sure that all the analysts that are on are non-aligned” if Hillary ascends to the general election? I have my doubts.

  3. belloscm — Sure as the sun’s gonna rise tomorrow, the analysts at CNN will go back to their normal… um… alignment in the general election. Of course, the other news sources haven’t even given this the superficial nod that CNN has, so it’s hard to be too mad at them, specifically.
    Re: the Obama campaign having leaned on CNN. It sounded to me as if CNN had committed to ousting the unaligned back in December (before the primaries were actually underway), but hadn’t delivered. Maybe Obama’s camp merely held their feet to the fire?

  4. Fair enough. I can’t disagree with any of what you have said. WRT FNC, I think that Kristol and Barnes have been fairly outspoken in support of a particular candidate, so a reduced role could be fairly, and IMO, wisely, considered.
    Does it matter that none of FNC’s prominent political commentators have not been campaign operatives for one of the current group of candidates?

  5. Should read: Does it matter that none of FNC’s prominent political commentators have been campaign operatives for one of the current group of candidates?

Read Next

Sliding Sidebar