CNN‘s Republican debate included questions from conservative talkshow host Hugh Hewitt. Why won’t there be a progressive asking questions at CNN‘s Democratic debate? (cc photo: Bill Rice)
At the CNN-sponsored Republican Party debate last month at the Reagan Library, one of the three panelists CNN selected to question the candidates was conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, affiliated with the proudly right-wing Salem Radio Network.
But at Tuesday’s upcoming Democratic Party debate, CNN is not planning to include a single progressive advocate among its panel of four questioners.
It’s clear that who gets to pose questions has impact on the tenor of the debate. For example, Hewitt used September’s Republican debate to declare that President Obama’s “knees buckled” over Syria and that every Republican candidate was “more qualified than” Hillary Clinton. Hewitt pressed Jeb Bush from the right over his comment about making sure guns are not in the hands of the mentally ill: “Where does it go from what you said last week, how far into people’s lives to take guns away from them?” (Hewitt’s appearance on the CNN panel is reportedly part of an agreement by which CNN and the right-wing Salem Media company are teaming up on three GOP presidential debates.)
At CNN‘s Republican debate last month, along with Hewitt, the panel was composed of two journalists CNN presents as neutral or objective: CNN anchor Jake Tapper and CNN correspondent Dana Bash.
At CNN‘s upcoming Democratic debate, the panel is to be composed of four journalists CNN presents as neutral: CNN‘s Bash and three CNN anchors (Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon, and Juan Carlos Lopez of CNN en Español.)
Glaringly missing from this proposed lineup is an unabashed progressive advocate.
There are many qualified journalists for this seat—from respected progressive media institutions that haven’t taken sides in the Democratic primaries (like The Nation or Mother Jones, to name just two).
For the sake of basic fairness and balance, CNN should add to its panel an unapologetic progressive for Tuesday’s debate.
ACTION:
Please call on CNN to bring in a progressive perspective to its Democratic debate, just as its Republican debates include a conservative.
CONTACT:
You can send messages to CNN here (or on Twitter @CNN). Feel free to leave a copy of your message to CNN in comments. Remember that respectful communication is the most effective.
You can sign Roots Action’s petition to CNN here.
Jeff Cohen is the director of the Park Center for Independent Media at Ithaca College. He founded FAIR in 1986.
Just tweeted @CNN to add a progressive panelist.
@CNN Hugh Hewitt questioned GOP candidates – how about @AmyGoodman_DN or @thomhartmann questioning the Dem candidates? #RealDebatesOrNone
Sent to CNN Feedback:
“Re: Democratic party debate moderators
“It has been suggested that it is unbalanced for CNN to have used an open conservative advocate (Hugh Hewitt) as one of the moderators for the GOP debate while not having an open progressive among the moderators for the Democratic debate.
“I have to admit I find the argument compelling and look forward to seeing CNN find the same and picking an open progressive as one of the moderators of the Democratic debate.
“Any reply would be welcome; a favorable one even more so. CNN has built its reputation on being the true ‘fair and balanced’ news network that does ‘lean forward’ rather than left or right. This is an opportunity to prove that. I urge you to take it.”
@CNN Cenk Uyger, Thom Hartmann, Marc Maron (would be so awesome), add a progressive voice to debate moderator panel
Why no progressive panelist? What are you thinking?
@CNN How about @Amy Goodman questioning the Dem candidates for the Democratic debate
Not fair. Not balanced.
“Republican candidates are presumed to need ideological sympathizers among their questioners—Fox News, for example”
If the content of that sentence is taken to be literally true it also means the ruling class, in a collaboration with conjunction with corporate media, is aware of the deep epistemological differences that exist between the (archetypal) personalities that develop an affinity for either liberal or conservative beliefs and values. It may be mere coincidence that the author of this article used the (above) quote to describe a key difference in intellectual “style”. But if he’s describing an objectively discrened diffrence in the way mainstream media (MSM) handles liberal versus conservative candidates, then what he has touched on is deeply alarming. Because that would mean MSM is aware of the research showing a very strong correlation between conservatism and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA – Altemeyer) and is not only making concessions to it but already using it to steer the political conversation in American homes.
I realize what I say has an overtone of ‘conspiracy theory’ about it. However I also think most anyone familiar with political science and cognitive development would also see the striking similarity between the type of thing a social scientist steeped in post-Adorno authoritarian research would advise a political operative to assume is correct, and what has been quoted above by the author of this article.
As someone who has immersed himself in the (scientific) literature for around 15 years I can say without hesitation that the correlation between hypothetical advice and quoted observation seems beyond statistical possibility.
CNN is OWNED by the 1%. Progressives represent the 99%. Why would CNN give air time to their political enemies? Answer: They wouldn’t and they don’t.