CNN Aims To Be Non-Partisan - Just Give The News

If they are going to go that route (and they should), then they also should also make their news reporting with dense with rich and varied reporting, become once again a news reporting agency with a wide thematic and geographic scope.

Otherwise it seems like they've ordered up a new paint job for the deck chairs.

In other words, pretend there are two equally honest parties, full of integrity and a desire to do what is best for the country in their own way, and cling to that stupid illusion like grim death. Great.

CNN did as much to keep Trump 's name alive after the election as Fox. They went further than reporting on Trump's behavior, they focused on it. Round table discussions are blah blah blah, no opposing views, same as Fox. They need to make drastic changes to reclaim their reputation.

R3 but the ratings went up

What if they go into a freefall if they start ignoring Trump

There is one political party that has essentially given up on democracy. That is the Republican Party. Also known as the Trump Cult. Can CNN report that, honestly? Or will it pretend this is the 1950s and two parties, equally matched, equally honorably, are trying to set forth different visions for the country and fight it out at the ballot box?

I might agree with every damn thing she says, but I don't want a news network giving me hour after hour of Rachel Maddow-like hosts with their unpacking and hand-holding and long, circuitous explanations that are completely unnecessary because I already understand the issue and share the same view. I don't want a daily dose of party talking points. And I don't want a news organization that pairs a story about razor blades in Halloween candy with a counter perspective. The every story has two equal and sides is complete bullshit. And so is the idea that every story must be explained and presented with a frame for how we are to 'feel' about it and react to it. Just report the fucking news and hit hard when the story is a real scandal -- and remember that not every story is an equal outrage.

The solution to stupid and biased or absurdly 'balanced' news isn't more of the same.

So in other words, go where the money is

They should hire more reporters and do more actual reporting around the country and the world. But the media is addicted to hiring analysts and strategists who scream at each other on panel after panel.

I agree, r8, but of course that always means "reporting on what exactly?" If it means interviewing every yahoo in a diner about how much they love and worship Trump, we've been there and it's tired.

I will say, it did seem when this first 24-hour news channel started, it did seem like an amazing opportunity to cover all sorts of uncovered stories, all over the world, and they pretty quickly abandoned that for same old, same old shit, but repeated over and over and over all day long, so that does actually suck. So I don't exactly disagree with you.

Covering the rise of fascism here in the U.S. would be a great service, by any news organization.

Don Lemon is in trouble.

I don't really care just as long as they don't go right wing which is a definite possibility considering their new owners.

[quote] Covering the rise of fascism here in the U.S. would be a great service, by any news organization

They want to move away from that

Yeah, that's the worry, r13. Head in the sand bullshit in the name of "objectivity."

Even if they report "just the news," rightwingers will label them Liberal Media and Fake News.

That's not what will happen, though. Most media make it a battle between the parties. But we've got one group willing to lie and cheat to grab power. The issue here is democracy and who is trying to keep it vs who is trying to take it away.

It's impossible for CNN's ratings to go any lower. They have to try something, why not objectivity?

CNN cancels 'Reliable Sources,' host Stelter leaving network

Reliable Sources,” and its host, appear to be the first prominent casualties in CNN's effort to become less confrontational politically, a priority of Chris Licht, who became the network's chairman and CEO in the spring, and his boss, David Zaslav, head of the Warner Bros. Discovery parent company.

Yup, that's what's needed. More "nonconfrontational" media in this stupid fucked up country. They're not big enough whores for power and money already. Please be more craven, media, America begs you.

[quote] It's impossible for CNN's ratings to go any lower.

actually ratings went through the roof during the Trump years, and ratings stayed up when CNN kept Trump accountable

This going back to "straight news" I guarantee the ratings will plummet

Problem is their ratings will suck except when some huge news story happens and when some huge news story happens like 9/11, then they usually even showing commercials, I am a news junky and I love hearing some news story about Thailand or Algeria but most people don't.

R11, Don Lemon is trouble.

What’s the scoop on David Culver? Just saw him for the first time.

[quote] What if they go into a freefall if they start ignoring Trump

No danger of that, R4. CNN, like MSNBC, is All Trump All The Time. A daily dose of Trump and how much he sucks. It’s like they’re fucking obsessed.

There are other things happening in the world but you wouldn’t know it watching CNN (or MSNBC.)

I’m so sick of this shit.

Likability is a major factor with ratings. That's a leading reason why shows like "FOX and Friends" and "The Five" are ratings giants. No matter what is aid, the participants seem to genuinely have a good time, and that's contagious. That's why non-likable personalities on CNN will be the first to go ...Jim Acosta, Brianna, etc.

Just stick him in jail r23, and we can get with our lives. He is a treasonous cunt and belongs in jail. That is the problem. He is not some innocent oppressed by the media. He is a treasonous cunt and intends to be a treasonous cunt the rest of his life. Stick him in jail and we can all be done with him.

If it becomes more like CNN International, fine. But it probably won't , since Americans don't have any interest in foreign news or the attention span for stories lasting more than 2 minutes.

[quote] Jim Acosta, Brianna,

Their schtick has been ‘OWNING Trump/the Repubs’ just like FOX’s is ‘OWNING the Libs.’ It was and is stupid and juvenile. They’ve both been toning that crap way down since the new owners took over though.

Except that Trump and Trumpism really is a problem, a constitutional problem. A president tried to stay in office without the bother of actually winning an election. That is a problem. It can't just be wished away because we need to "both sides" this thing.

And actually, Trump wouldn't be such a problem except that the Republican Party with very, very few exceptions still supports him in that attempt to steal that election, as a matter of doctrine and holy writ. You still need to embrace that lie to have a future in the Republican Party.

You don't need all the "analysts" and roundtable discussions to show how bad Trump is. You can just report the news - the lawsuits, the searches by the FBI, the guilty pleas (another one today! - Weisselberg), the January 6 convictions - and anyone who's watching will realize what a crook Trump is without having to be told. It's all legitimately news and there doesn't need to be a partisan spin on it. You don't have to spend a lot of time on it, but it's still news.

CNN would actually be really effective against Trump if people thought they were reporting the news without an agenda and Trump still came out looking terrible, which he would.

Zaslav is a right winger so this was to be expected.

[quote]CNN would actually be really effective against Trump if people thought they were reporting the news without an agenda and Trump still came out looking terrible, which he would.

I wish this were true. I get what you are saying. Theoretically you are correct, and I suspect hectoring is not the answer. But "just give the people the facts and they will, in their wisdom and goodness, reach the best conclusion" is sadly, probably false. People are infinitely more emotional than that.

[quote]Round table discussions are blah blah blah, no opposing views, same as Fox.

No they didn’t. They were no worse than MSNBC in this regard.

CNN used to be a neutral source of news, years ago. They need a restoration of early principles and renounce partisan reporting and so-called “analysis”.

It's not possible to be non-partisan in today's world. CNN will try, once again, and fail, once again.

Nonpartisan is one thing. Should CNN be completely indifferent to all constitutional questions, altogether? Should it be completely neutral on all questions of right and wrong in politics? You can make that case, actually, but do you want to? Does CNN want to? Should it be indifferent to fascism versus democracy? Again, you could make that case. Is that what everyone is talking about here?

[quote] CNN would actually be really effective against Trump if people thought they were reporting the news without an agenda and Trump still came out looking terrible, which he would.

That is so true. Like in a courtroom, present both the accusations and the defense, in their own words, and both the damning and exculpatory evidence, and the viewers will trust what they are seeing and arrive at the right verdict. If the viewers don’t get it “right”, that would be the fault of one side or the other not making their case well enough.

It is exactly courtrooms where that so often just doesn't happen r37. That is the dilemma here. So often, presenting everything as if everything was reasonable and equal is precisely the problem here. And in courtrooms, so often it really is about manipulation. I don't think you are wrong, but there is something a little naive about this whole theory.

[quote] Nonpartisan is one thing. Should CNN be completely indifferent to all constitutional questions, altogether? Should it be completely neutral on all questions of right and wrong in politics?

There are countless politicians and organizations that can go on CNN and talk about Constitutional questions. That doesn’t end in any scenario. The point is that the staff at CNN don’t need to show a bias. Just let other people, a wide range of people, talk for a change.

[quote] So often, presenting everything as if everything was reasonable and equal is precisely the problem here. And in courtrooms, so often it really is about manipulation. I don't think you are wrong, but there is something a little naive about this whole theory.

If the goal is getting viewers always to believe “right” and pre-determined acceptable conclusions, that requires manipulation of the news and the use of propaganda, and there’s a lot, not a little, wrong with that. If we are going to allow citizens to freely draw conclusions about the news, then like with jury trials, we are going to have to accept cases where we think they got it “wrong”.

That's how it started. Just the news.

[quote] Just let other people, a wide range of people, talk for a change.

Do we really need another "serious" look at Trump voters in a diner in the middle of nowhere? What are they going to add beyond the "liberal elites just don't listen to us!" as the trucks roll by on the way to that overpass they're rebuilding using local labor and contractors, thanks to the The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or their grandma is finally able to afford her insulin [italic]and[/italic] eat, thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act?

You're all ignoring the elephant in the room. Reality has a liberal bias.

Stifling people like Stetler helps Trump. They’re just removing critics of Trump. I’m guessing the new guy is a Republican Trump supporter who wants CNN to be Fox lite. That’s idiotic because Fox people like Fox, Democrats do not like Fox and they aren’t going to watch a lite version. If this guy thinks objective reporting is so important, go work for Fox and change Fox.

"Non-partisan" does NOT mean non-agenda and non-spin. Americans look to the media to reinforce their biases and worldview. CNN is well aware of this and will spin accordingly.

Yay, more "both sides" bullshit from CNN.

It is very difficult to rebrand your self as a non-partisan news source after years of heavily skewed reporting.

I don't think a non-partisan news would get people to pay for it.

Fake News Humpty Dumpty?

🥴🥴🥴

What the fuck, brehs - I love cable news now!

Jake Tapper should go next.

His anti-Biden, anti-Democrat, Pro-Republican bias shows up daily.

I can't believe Stelter is straight. My gaydar is usually never wrong.

Brian Stelter has a face for radio and a voice for silent films. Not sure how he ever ended up with an on camera job.

Strange that Chris Licht is taking this approach. Partisanship is kind of his thing.

He put Morning Joe on the map, then was hired by CBS to make This Morning like Morning Joe.

Then he was moved to take over Late Show With Stephen Colbert, which was foundering and only became a hit after Colbert was unleashed to be totally, vocally anti-Trump.

Now he's a neutral statesman at CNN? It's kind of like NBC hiring Fred Silverman in 1979 to make it the "quality TV" network. And he ended up putting on Pink Lady & Jeff.

I watched Reliable Sources exactly because they addressed CNN's in-house dirty laundry. This is who and what they are silencing, the in-house snitch. It's absurd for people to read this as a first salvo in a war for some kind of "valuable"/asinine policy of 'there were good Nazis marching in Charlottesville' perspective on domestic affairs. It is to laugh. Ha ha.

[quote] It's absurd for people to read this as a first salvo in a war for some kind of "valuable"/asinine policy of 'there were good Nazis marching in Charlottesville' perspective on domestic affairs. It is to laugh. Ha ha.

Straw man argument. It’s absurd to say as you did that nonpartisan means saying that there are good Nazis.

This is why I mostly watch BBC World News.

The BBC was tolerable for a while, but now that they’re letting non-RP speakers pollute our beautiful minds 24-7, I give them a miss.

Jake Tapper retweeted Ivanka’s promotional post about her gross husband’s book.

Tapper is being had on Twitter.

He is a fucking tool. Always in for clicks and likes and fame. Hope he writes more shitty books and goes down in flames 🔥

[quote]Brian Stelter has a face for radio and a voice for silent films. Not sure how he ever ended up with an on camera job.

Does this mean that DL's favorite villain Andy Cohen will no longer do their NYE party? Will he be replaced by someone like Wolf Blitzer who will plainly countdown until Midnight?

BRING BACK BOBBIE BATTISTA!

Bring back DL's second-favorite fat gurl Candy Crowley!

As if CNN will Ever be just the facts. When I see it, I'll believe it.

Jake Tapper is a fucking Republican tool!

Jake Tapper.was a top.writer for.Salon and wrote the expose about Henry Hyde having an affair when he was younger during the Clinton impeachment. So I don't think he's a conservative. But I do think he may be a Clintonista who isn't crazy about the Obama/Biden wing of the party.

BREAKING - new chief at CNN has met privately with Republican Members of Congress recently to get their view(s) on how CNN might be more accommodating to Republican positions when airing the news on CNN.

Really? I thought Brian Stelter got the axe because he's a low-IQ, bootlicking flake.

‘We Want To Win Back Your Trust’: New CNN Boss Chris Licht Makes Groveling ‘Apology Tour’ To GOP Lawmakers On Capitol Hill

CNN chairman and CEO Chris Licht is desperately trying to win back Republican viewers by having GOP lawmakers return as guests to the network

in mid-July, Licht reportedly secretly met with a number of Republicans on the first floor of the U.S. Capitol building in an effort to convince the lawmakers to return as guests on CNN.

In fact, according to the Washington Free Beacon, Licht had one simple message for the Republican lawmakers: “We want to win back your trust.”

Although Licht’s meetings and conversations with Republicans at the Capitol last week largely remained private, lawmakers who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon told the outlet that the new CNN chief pleaded for them to return to the air on the network and that he promised they would be “treated fairly.”

"I think he does genuinely want that to happen," one lawmaker said. "Put aside ideology, I think he thinks CNN sucks."

Matt Dornic, a spokesperson for CNN who declined to provide comment regarding Licht’s meetings with the Republican lawmakers, did emphasize that Licht’s “top priority” was making CNN a place where viewers could “hear from elected officials on both sides of the aisle.”

"Chris has made it clear that his top priority is to make CNN a place for fair and respectful dialogue, analysis and debate,” Dornic told the outlet.

Dornic added, “He believes our audiences deserve to hear from elected officials on both sides of the aisle and will continue to engage a variety of voices."

this is just the latest step in Licht’s plan to refocus the politically left-leaning CNN back closer to the center.

In June, Licht reportedly threatened to fire CNN’s on-air talent – particularly Don Lemon, Jim Acosta, Brian Stelter and Brianna Keilar – if the hosts continued their blatantly partisan and polarizing reporting, something that first began during the four years ex-President Donald Trump was still in the White House.

“If you are a Jake Tapper or a Wolf Blitzer, you don’t need to be worried about this,” former CNN reporter Dylan Byers said regarding Licht’s meeting with CNN’s on-air talent in June. “Again, those names that have come up—Jim Acosta, Brian Stelter, Brianna Keilar—I don’t know if all of those anxieties have been quelled!”

Sounds as if the new guy has his guns set on Anderson and Don Lemon.

"I thought Brian Stelter got the axe because he's a low-IQ, bootlicking flake."

R66, you seem to have him confused with Fucker Carlson.

[quote]BREAKING - new chief at CNN has met privately with Republican Members of Congress recently to get their view(s) on how CNN might be more accommodating to Republican positions when airing the news on CNN.

In other words, the "both sides" false-equivalency treatment others have already predicted in this thread.

Don Lemon and Jim Acosta, two of CNN’s most opinionated and outspoken on-air journalists, are expected to stay at the network despite its new direction to a less overtly left-wing bent, an individual with knowledge of the network’s plan told TheWrap.

They want Jake Tapper to do mornings now, so The Lead might be no more. Ugh Tapper on that early to compete with Morning Joe is a no bueno.

Joe & Mika are going to own Jake’s ass in the ratings.

[quote]In other words, the "both sides" false-equivalency treatment others have already predicted in this thread

Well, there IS two sides. Nobody is saying to platform Jim Jordan or MTG to get the conservative viewpoint. Living in an echo chamber isn’t healthy and it’s helping to fuel the partisan hackery from…yup, both sides.

John Malone, one of the largest investors in Warner Bros. Discovery.-CNN merger has been vocal about CNN “evolve back to the kind of journalism that it started with, and actually have journalists.” - telling the Times he wants “the ‘news’ portion of CNN to be more centrist,

[quote] Nobody is saying to platform Jim Jordan or MTG to get the conservative viewpoint.

But the are the Conservative viewpoint - There is no longer a Republican Party, it is the party of Trump

Haven't you figured that out yet?

There are two sides. There's my side, and the wrong side.

Boycott cnn is top trending on Twitter

[quote] John Malone, one of the largest investors in Warner Bros. Discovery.-CNN merger has been vocal about CNN “evolve back to the kind of journalism that it started with, and actually have journalists.” - telling the Times he wants “the ‘news’ portion of CNN to be more centrist,

John Malone is a LIBETARIAN - hardly a "centrist"

The concept of nonpartisanship rests on the assumption that both parties are operating in good faith within democratic principles. The Republicans don't do that.

Think about the children — and STAWKS!!!

“CNN took on Trump”

Yes after they made him happen. It’s funny to me that CNN is described by trumpkins as biased against him when he never would have been elected without CNN.

CNN is biased, of course — toward CNN. It’s a for profit network that will do anything for ratings.

It’s actually always been schlock news central, ever since the 80s when it started up and was VNR Central.

^^^ that said, it’s Edward R Murrow compared to the blatant propaganda monotonously droned on Fox “News.”

[quote]Yes after they made him happen. It’s funny to me that CNN is described by trumpkins as biased against him when he never would have been elected without CNN.

CNN didn’t make Trump. Fox did. Trumpanzees don’t watch/never watched CNN and if you recall Trump would single them out as fake news and even tried to have Jim Acosta barred.

[quote] The concept of nonpartisanship rests on the assumption that both parties are operating in good faith within democratic principles.

No. There is no assumption. That's just it.

All your terms require a definition which can be and actually do get distorted or "personally" defined and then used to argue an agenda.

I guarantee that those idiots who broke into the Capitol would argue they acted within democratic principles. Or at least American principles. WE argued that our anti-war activities were democratic at their core and truly patriotic - even when we broke the law.

It is ridiculous to suggest that reporters and journalists are incapable of objectively imparting events in the world. When the media outlet wants to opine then just label it as such. And yes invite on people of differing opinions.

No one should know what your politics/opinions are if you want to be a journalist or reporter.

[quote] CNN didn’t make Trump

When CNN airs every single Trump rally (giving him FREE advertising) - then CNN MADE Trump as well as Fox

This is the fog of monetization.

If it genuinely re-focusing on news, not commentary (think Walter Cronkite) that's admirable. But it's likely just a decision to throw red meat at the right wing Tribe... i.e. just reinforcing partisanship under the guise of "non-partisan."

Real, in depth reporting: no great increase in viewership. Inflammatory content: increased profits.

CNN and Headline News - just presented the news and by end of the 90s, ratings dropped

That is when they went to t he "Opinion" type shows that Fox News excels at

If they go back to the way it was in the 90s, then ratings will drop further

It'd be amazing if instead of professional talking heads they had some real people who live in this country on for an opinion once in a while (not those moderated "voters groups" either).

[quote]It'd be amazing if instead of professional talking heads they had some real people who live in this country on for an opinion once in a while (not those moderated "voters groups" either).

Yes, it's always fascinating when the New York Times talks to Trump supporters in an effort to understand their concerns.

New CNN policy: the Cult of Trump, formerly the GOP, is just as valid and legitimate as the Democratic Party, and they must always be allowed equal time and respect.

[quote] The concept of nonpartisanship rests on the assumption that both parties are operating in good faith within democratic principles.

No, it doesn’t. It requires not making or acting on assumptions.

Chris Licht is delusional if he thinks right-wingers are going to stop calling CNN "fake news" by being more "non-partisan".

What genius installed him as the CEO?

It's the opposite. They are trying to be more partisan towards Republicans

Their ratings are in the toilet like MSNBC. They have to do something else. If they become more like the BBC and just report news, not one talking head after the next, that will be refreshing to viewers.

[quote] that will be refreshing to viewers.

But will they watch?

That will be refreshing to a handful of viewers, R95. Most people today only want "news" that confirms their opinions.

[quote]That will be refreshing to a handful of viewers, [R95]. Most people today only want "news" that confirms their opinions.

Which is how we got here.

[quote] Their ratings are in the toilet like MSNBC. They have to do something else. If they become more like the BBC and just report news, not one talking head after the next, that will be refreshing to viewers.

Did you miss the part where their ratings went up under Trump, R95?

CNN web site outperforms Fox by threefold. The idea that CNN is completely failing is unfounded. I think the new CEO wants to achieve the same success for the cable news as it has for web traffic. People "click on CNN" to get the news, not to see commentary. Oddly, on the website you get links to the programs on the cable channel anyway...

r95 One would find the problem wasn't so much with one talking head after another... but the greater complaints were towards the lack of information; or at least, that too much focus would be given to bizarre and superficial tangents, rather than what was actually taking place on the hill, to which there was plenty to criticize... and also, that many felt those kind of segments legitimized the complaints of "fake news" ... and the audience felt less informed. . because seemingly every commentator went off the rails or thought their job was merely trolling.

Also, the numerous scandals behind the scene that went on for far too long hurt a great deal of their credibility and their colleagues. This is the other side of positioning themselves as they did and hiding behind the excuse that it must be a rightwing conspiracy to call out hosts on their bad behavior and expect the network to show some integrity.

of course, that's not to say there wasn't likely a strong rightwing base that was using that as momentum to counter their credibility but it was no excuse either. . to the far left - it was the bourgeoisie as usual and their class privilege in action. Albeit, the far left was annoyed they weren't getting adequate time on CNN and when they did, many of their segments were highly edited.. which perhaps they should have saw as a good thing because it worked out better than when those interviews and debates on fox where they were given enough rope to hang themselves with.

you know, they brought on more "experts" to debate Trump's well being over ice cream and cake batter than his out of control spending, his geopolitical maneuvering and the funding of far right organizations from members of his cabinet.

Can you believe that guy ran the Stephen Colbert show???

1. I think CNN and MSNBC are struggling because Trump is no longer President. Democrats either like Biden or are disappointed in him, but he's not exciting in either case. Trump was constant drama. Happily, Biden is not. This is less of a problem for Fox because their viewers are upset that Republicans are out of office.

2. Is there really space for MSNBC and CNN to both be typed as "liberal channels"?

3. Isn't Newsnation, which has hired Chris Cuomo, trying play in this middle-of-the-road space too? They have been slow to make inroads as it is. If CNN does this, I don't see how they can break in.

I think MSNBC and Fox helped Trump. Very few people watch CNN.

Yeah, it’s crazy to say that CNN helped Fox. Mika and Joe on MSNBC did more to help Trump than CNN airing rallies that their audience watched to see crazy Trump.

[quote]Jake Tapper retweeted Ivanka’s promotional post about her gross husband’s book.

He had on that Dan Crenshaw creep this morning and just let him lie repeatedly about the FBI victimizing poor innocent Trump.

CNN may not have helped Fox but they helped Trump. During the Democratic primaries in 2016, they were posting articles on their website saying Bernie was "catching up" to Hillary, when he in fact was losing ground. They'd post old articles about bad news for Hillary or her campaign and put them on their front page as if they were new. They pushed the idea that the Democrats rigged the primary -- MSNBC was worse about it, but CNN helped. CNN has always been a big purveyor of Dems In Disarray articles.

The Republicans pushed the "Clinton News Network" meme because they knew CNN was the easiest existing news outlet to bully into being more right-leaning, and it's working.

It is too late for CNN to rebrand after years of partisan. They are doomed.

[quote]“It’s not a good brand position to be the opposite of Fox News,” said a network insider familiar with Licht’s thinking. “He wants to be tough and no bulls—, but not affiliated with a side. It’s fair to say he doesn’t like the CNN vs. Fox thing.”

I hope they'll stop their motherfucking bullshit where they have a republican on and they just allow them to LIE, LIE, LIE

CNN has been dead to me since trump was elected. The NY Times has been dead to me since they were cheerleaders for the Iraq war

American media is a complete and utter joke

If they really want to be impartial, they should never have Wolf Blitzer of Jake tapper covering anything related to the Mideast conflict.

R107, Trump ended up being their tomb. After Roe v. Wade was repealed, I was curious what the major news networks were saying about it. MSNBC and Fox were discussing what was breaking and history defining news.

I turned to CNN and they were doing extended commentary on Trump’s part in Jan 6. They weren’t even discussing it.

CNN was dead to me in that moment. They’re like a psycho ex boyfriend who can’t move on. History is literally happening on your doorstep and you’re talking about someone who hasn’t been President for a year and a half!

Talk about being totally irrelevant.

or* Jake

R107 that should have read helped Trump and not Fox.

Oh joy! Wolf Blitzer 7 hours a day

Does that mean GQP friendly Dana Bash stays?

And then there is L. Borger.

^Gloria Borger

If CNN wants to be impartial, they will need to correct all lies, immediately and without apology, during interviews. The hosts will need to prepare in advance for every possible falsehood and have factual rebuttals at the ready. The website should immediately post an article with the statements made, fact checks, and historical context of claims. The GOP are the master of creating conditions that the Dems were blocked from preventing or correcting, then turning around and blaming everyone but themselves.

Here's how it's done, lazy American media:

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Not a troll or idiot…didn’t know you the rules can’t post daily mail !

CNN tried to be non-partisan is like KFC tried to be vegetarian restaurant. It is absurd.

Watch CNN give Don Lemon a Soul Food cooking show to run out his contract while still dovetailing with the rebrand.

OP,

Your polls does not ask the correct question.

Here it is:

“Do you support CNN ceasing existing operations?”

My answer: Yes.

And yet another example..Go Woke..Go Broke.

Time to listen up dopes.

Has this site gone all full on lesbetarian of late?

The point is good journalism. Licht is being disingenuous. What's his background anyway?

Keith Olbermann has some stories about Chris Licht.

He threatened peeps at MSNBC who tried to cross Joe S.

This is not a good guy, surprising Stephen Colbert had him on staff.

Derelichte!

Forgive me, who is Joe S?

R128

Joe Scarborough

That’s why Licht was trying to poach Joe & Mika.

R125 Well, exactly. If the story starts, "he wants CNN to move more to the middle..." that's exactly the national problem. Journalism, truth: always seek and report the truth, not serving the interests of consumerism or power.

Ethics... so retro.

Joe & Mika are often absent on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. Joe, in particular, takes a lot of days and weeks off.

When there. Joe makes a good impact and has committed followers.

If CNN wants to be non-partisan, they can start asking tough questions such as:

Biden has sent $55 billion to Ukraine. He’s scheduled to send another $3 billion. WHY?

When Bush Jr was in office, CNN many times implied he was profiting from the Iraq War. So know they can make the same implication with Biden.

R132 You guys aren't even trying anymore.

Russia invades neighbor. Western democracies respond.

Troll better, k?