OCTOBER 9, 2019
NEWS AND VIEWS
ABOUT SLOWING DOWN, NOT SO FAST!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/sanders-says-he-misspoke-about-scaling-back-rallies-after-heart-n1064351
Sanders says he 'misspoke' about scaling back rallies after heart
attack, vows 'vigorous' 2020 campaign
Sanders also pushed back at criticism that his campaign was not
transparent about his health, saying it "acted appropriately" before
disclosing he had a heart attack.
Oct. 9, 2019, 4:05 PM EDT
By Dartunorro Clark
VIDEO -- Exclusive: Bernie Sanders speaks out after heart attack
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Wednesday tamped down speculation that he would
slow his presidential campaign after he suffered a heart attack last week,
saying he plans to compete as vigorously as ever for the 2020 Democratic
nomination.
The Vermont independent told NBC in an exclusive interview airing
Wednesday night on "Nightly News" and Thursday on the
"Today" show that his health scare has only strengthened his resolve,
despite telling reporters a day earlier he planned to curtail his normally
packed schedule.
"I misspoke the other day. I said a word I should not have said
and media drives me a little bit nuts to make a big deal about it,"
Sanders said during the interview alongside his wife, Jane Sanders. "We're
going to get back into the groove of a very vigorous campaign, I love doing
rallies and I love doing town meetings.”
He added, "I want to start off slower and build up and build up
and build up."
Speaking to reporters outside his home in Vermont on Monday, Sanders
said, "We were doing in some cases five or six meetings a day, three or
four rallies and town meetings and meeting with groups of people. I don't think
I'm going to do that. But I certainly intend to be actively campaigning. I
think we can change the nature of the campaign a bit. Make sure that I have the
strength to do what I have to do."
Sanders was hospitalized last Tuesday after experiencing chest pains at
a campaign event in Nevada. He told NBC News that he went to a nearby urgent
care center, and that the doctor there told him he was having a heart attack.
Sanders was subsequently treated for what his 2020 presidential
campaign described at the time as a blockage in one artery. A statement from
Sanders' doctors released through the campaign Friday called the episode a
"myocardial infarction," a medical term for a heart attack.
In the interview with NBC News, Sanders also pushed back at criticism
that his campaign was not transparent about the matter.
"That's nonsense," he said. "I don't know what people
think campaigns are, you know we're dealing with all kinds of doctors and we
wanted to have a sense of what the hell was going on really."
He added, "So the first thing that we're trying to do is
understand what's going on and not run to The New York Times and have to report
every 15 minutes. You know, this is not a baseball game. So I think we acted
absolutely appropriately."
Sanders, 78, is the oldest candidate in the Democratic field and if he
wins the nomination, he would be older than President Donald Trump, 73, in the
general election.
Sanders acknowledged in the interview that age and health are relevant
to voters during a campaign, but so too is a candidate’s platform.
“It is a factor,” he said of questions about his age and health, “[but]
so is what you’re standing for — you’re running for president, what do you
stand for?"
Sanders said that he feels strong and will continue to actively push
for his progressive agenda.
"People should think that I had a procedure which hundreds of
thousands of people a year have, people should think that, according to the
doctors, that I am on my way to a full recovery, people should think that I
have an enormous amount of energy — and it not what they think, it’s what
they're going to see,” he said.
“I’m healthy and we're going to run a vigorous campaign and we’re going
to win this thing.”
Sanders said that he plans to release all of his medical records, but
declined to specify when. He also said that he plans to attend the fourth Democratic primary
debate in Ohio next week, and that he and his doctor have no concerns about
participating in the three-hour event.
Image: Dartunorro Clark
Dartunorro Clark
Dartunorro Clark is a political reporter for NBC News.
I THINK THIS SERIES IS GOING TO BE SCIENTIFIC AS WELL AS MORAL. IT WILL
SHOW AUGUST 13 ON DISCOVERY
"Why We Hate": Steven Spielberg on docuseries...
Hollywood legend Steven Spielberg is behind a new documentary series set
to air Sunday on Discovery Channel. “Why We Hate” is a
six-part series that takes a close look at hatred and how we can fight it.
Mark Strassmann spoke with Spielberg and co-executive producer Alex Gibney for
an interview.
1H AGO OCTOBER 9, 2019
TO GET THAT CANCER DIAGNOSIS, AND TO HAVE TO DIE SO SOON REALLY IS A
CRUEL FATE. I FEEL FOR THEM ALL.
NEUROENDOCRINE CANCER: BERNIE SANDERS' DAUGHTER-IN-LAW RAINE RIGGS DIES
TWO DAYS AFTER DIAGNOSIS OF RARE FORM OF DISEASE
BY ROSIE MCCALL ON 10/9/19 AT 5:58 AM EDT
VIDEO – “What is a tumor?”
Senator Bernie Sanders' daughter-in-law, Rainè Riggs, has died aged
48 of neuroendocrine cancer, just two days after she received a diagnosis.
According to an obituary published by the Lee & Martin Funeral Home
in Burgettstown, Pennsylvania, Riggs came down with a mysterious illness
three weeks ago that had hospitals "stumped". She was brought home
last Sunday and was later diagnosed with neuroendocrine cancer, dying just two
days later on October 5 at 9:11 p.m.
"Her last moment was spent with her No. 1 cheerleader, her mother,
holding her hand and whispering in her ear how much she loved her," her
obituary reads.
bernie sanders in 2017
Bernie Sanders pictured in 2017 with Jane Sanders (right) and Levi
Sanders, Rainè Riggs's husband (left).
MIREYA ACIERTO/FILMMAGIC
Riggs was married to Sanders' son Levi Sanders, who she met while
working at an emergency food shelter. Her obituary describes her as "a
truly selfless person" who was fully involved in working with the
homeless—homeless veterans in particular— and volunteered at ground zero
following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
In addition to her volunteering work, Riggs achieved a master's
degree in geriatric neuropsychology and clinical sleep medicine at Brown
University, where she received an award from the National Institute of
Health for her work on chemotherapy and its effects on the brain.
She later completed her doctorate in neuropsychology at the University
of Vermont and worked for several years as the co-director of Behavioral
Medicine at Dartmouth Medical School, where she founded its Palliative Care
Department for Dartmouth Medical Center.
"I don't know how our family will ever get over this loss as she
was loved so much," her obituary reads.
"I do know that we will continue on because we have to.... we
promised her we would."
What is neuroendocrine cancer?
Neuroendocrine cancer is a rare form of tumor that develops in the
body's neuroendocrine cells—cells similar to nerve cells that also produce
hormones (like endocrines). The job of these cells is to take messages from
the nervous system and release hormones in response.
Neuroendocrine cells can be found all over the body, including the
gastrointestinal (GI) tract, the lungs, the pancreas and the thyroid. As a
result, neuroendocrine tumors can develop anywhere in the body. The Mayo
Clinic says they are most likely to be found in the lungs, appendix, small
intestine, rectum and pancreas.
According to the American Society of Clinical Oncology, approximately
30 percent develop in the bronchial system, a further 43 percent occur in the
GI and 7 percent are found in the pancreas.
The exact cause of the cancer is not known but relates to mutations in
the DNA of neuroendocrine cells. Diagnosis and treatment will vary depending on
the location of the tumor, how aggressive it is, and whether it has spread to
any other body part, as well as its type.
Those with neuroendocrine cancer may not necessarily show signs
straight away but when symptoms do occur, they can include a growing lump,
pain, fatigue and unexplained weight loss. If the tumor produces an excess of
hormones, patients may also experience skin flushing, diarrhea, dizziness,
shakiness, skin rash, excess thirst and frequent urination, the Mayo Clinic
states.
Correction: This article originally stated Bernie Sanders is a
representative. He is a Senator.
COMMENTS
This is heartbreaking and tragic.
I will be praying for Bernie and his family. I also sincerely hope Bernie takes care of
himself. He has served this nation with
honor and courage for decades.
So sorry for the whole family.. I was diagnosed with this cancer, less
then a year ago.. I was told that it is very slow growing. There is not much available in the way of
testing and treatment. This cancer is so
misunderstood, understudied, and misdiagnosed by the medical community who does
not seem to take it very seriously. I do
hope to learn more about her particular diagnosis, stage and grade. I hope this helps to give awareness to the
importance of taking this seriously. God
rest her soul. Her life's work,
according to the article was to help others.
Maybe this public announcement might prompt some action by those who
should be involved.
Sanders is a Senator, not a rep
Bernie Sanders is a senator, Newsweek.
the Outlier says it so well. I add my prayers for Bernie and family.
Bernie actually passed away several days ago with his heart attack.
Imagine a Real Life Weekend at Bernie's with George Soros pupating his dead
body around at the next DNC debate.
Reply
SUCH DISGUSTING BILGEWATER, AND YOU CAN'T SPELL, EITHER! PUPATING???
DID YOU MEAN "PURPORTING"? BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE, EITHER. MAYBE
YOU WERE CALLING GEORGE SOROS A FLY? LOVE YOU "CONSERVATIVES."
This is a truly heartbreaking story. My family sends our deepest
condolences to the Sanders family.
Although I didn't know her, she seemed to live her life in a truly
inspiring and American way. She
embodied the importance of service and empathy that a lot of people have
shunned. May God himself personally
welcome this wonderful woman to heaven.
3 Likes
HERE IS THE STORY THAT PEOPLE ON THE MORE RIGHT-LEANING PART OF THE
POLITICAL SPECTRUM HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR. AS MUCH AS I WANT SANDERS TO BE
PRESIDENT, I WANT HIM TO BE HEALTHY MUCH MORE. HE IS TOO GOOD TO DIE YOUNG. HE
WILL ALWAYS BE A LEADER IN THE FORMATION OF OUR POLITICAL THOUGHT, AND UNLESS I
AM MUCH MISTAKEN, A HELPER TO GROUPS LIKE UNIONS WHEN THEY CAN USE A BOOST. IF
THE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY CAN BE EASED INTO A HABIT OF BEING ALERT AND
POLITICALLY ACTIVE INSTEAD OF PASSIVE AND DULL, HE WILL HAVE MADE THE CHANGE THAT
IS NEEDED. I BELIEVE HIS PRESENCE AT A STRIKE WILL ALWAYS IMPROVE THE WORKERS’
ABILITY TO MAKE A BETTER DEAL, AND IF HE WORKS FOR HIS CAUSES UNTIL THE END, HE
WILL HAVE DONE HIS EARTHLY TASK, I BELIEVE. I FEEL SURE HE WILL BE ABLE TO BE REELECTED
TO THE SENATE AS OFTEN AS HE WANTS TO, AND THERE ARE MORE BOOKS TO WRITE.
I’M SURE HE WILL SEND SURROGATES TO SOME OF THOSE EXTRA CAMPAIGN
OCCASIONS, AND HOPEFULLY THAT WON’T DISTURB THE PEOPLE SO MUCH THAT THEY WON’T STILL
CONSIDER VOTING FOR HIM. FOR THOSE WHO AREN’T COMMITTED YET, MAYBE THEY WILL GO
FOR QUALITY OVER QUANTITY IN THIS CASE. NOT EVERYBODY IS OF THE TYPE WHO WILL
NOT VOTE FOR ANYONE WHO HAS A LESSER CHANCE, THEY BELIEVE, TO WIN BECAUSE THEY
DON’T WANT TO “WASTE THEIR VOTE.” THERE IS NOW A VERY SMALL FIELD OF FRONT
RUNNERS, UNLESS SOME OF THE SINGLE DIGIT CAMPAIGNERS PUT ON A MUCH STRONGER PUSH
FOR THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDACY, BIDEN, SANDERS AND WARREN, AND JUST IN THE LAST
TWO WEEKS, ALL OF THEM HAVE ENCOUNTERED A STUMBLING BLOCK THAT THEY WILL NEED TO
OVERCOME.
FOR BIDEN, IT’S THE HIDDEN RACISM AND INAPPROPRIATE TOUCHING ISSUES,
AND HIS AGE; FOR WARREN, IT’S HER STATED TURNABOUT FROM A CONSERVATIVE IN HER
YOUNG YEARS TO -- WE HOPE – A GENUINE PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT TODAY, THE
RIDICULOUS NAME THAT TRUMP CALLS HER, AND A STORY FROM JUST YESTERDAY OF BEING
FIRED FROM A PART TIME SCHOOL TEACHING POSITION OVER HER PREGNANCY. AS FOR THE
PREGNANCY STORY, EVERY WOMAN OF OUR AGE GROUP IS FAMILIAR WITH THAT SITUATION.
IT USED TO HAPPEN ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND STILL DOES, I FEEL FAIRLY SURE. MOST
SITUATIONS ON THE SMALL SCCALE DON’T COME TO LIGHT. THEY JUST HIDE IT BETTER
NOWADAYS, AND MOST PEOPLE DON’T THINK IT’S COST EFFECTIVE TO SUE. STILL, I WISH
THEY WOULD. I ALSO WISH THAT THERE WERE MORE UNIONS AS THERE WERE WHEN I WAS
YOUNG.
NOW, FOR BERNIE, IT’S THE SOCIALISM ISSUE (IMPORTANT MAINLY TO THE LESS
“WORLDLY,” PROFESSIONALLY EDUCATED AND LIBERAL PEOPLE), THE FACT THAT HE’S
JEWISH (NOT SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE TALK OUT LOUD ABOUT MUCH THESE DAYS), THE
FACT THAT SOME THINK THAT HE CHEATED HILLARY CLINTON OUT OF HER BIRTHRIGHT, AND
NOW HIS HEART ATTACK.
THAT’S TWO OR THREE STRIKES AGAINST EACH OF THEM, SO IT’S STILL A “HORSERACE,”
AND THE ONE WHO WINS WILL BE THE ONE WHO WINS. THAT’S HOW WE DECIDE OUR
PRESIDENCIES. WE WON’T KNOW UNTIL IT’S OVER, AND I’M NOT GOING TO WITHDRAW MY
LOYALTY BECAUSE SOMEBODY TRIES TO DISCOURAGE ME, OR MORE IMPORTANTLY,
DISCOURAGE BERNIE. GOOD TRY, CNN, BUT YOU LOSE THIS ROUND, AND BERNIE, I HOPE YOU’RE
UP AND AT ‘EM AGAIN SOON. CHRIS CILLIZZA, I’VE GOT MY EYE ON YOU!
Bernie Sanders is scaling back his campaigning. That's a big deal.
Chris Cillizza
Analysis by Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large
Updated 9:40 AM ET, Wed October 9, 2019
PHOTOGRAPH – SANDERS HOLDING A MICROPHONE
(CNN)On Tuesday night, just days removed from acknowledging that he had
suffered a heart attack less than a week ago on the campaign trail, Bernie
Sanders said something remarkable.
Here it is:
"We were doing (in) some cases five or six meetings today, three
or four rallies and town meetings and meeting with groups of people. I don't
think I'm going to do that. But I certainly intend to be actively campaigning.
I think we can change the nature of the campaign a bit. Make sure I have the
strength to do what needs to be done."
It doesn't take much reading in between the lines to conclude this:
Sanders is scaling back his campaigning to protect his health. Which makes all
the sense in the world! After all, he is a 78-year-old man who just had a heart
attack. Keeping up
a wildly hectic campaign schedule -- speech after speech in multiple states in
the course of a week or even a few days -- is hugely difficult and stressful
for anyone, much less someone in his position.
But this is politics. And while Sanders' announcement makes perfect
sense from a health perspective, it will only fuel questions about whether
he is up to the job he is running for.
Remember that if Sanders is elected president next November, he will
be the oldest person to win a first term in the White House by almost a decade!
(Donald Trump currently holds that record; he was elected in 2016 at age 70.)
There were already some concerns within the Democratic Party -- although not
among Sanders' most ardent supporters -- that nominating someone who would turn
80 very early in his first term would be a real risk. Now those concerns go
from back-burner to front-burner.
Also, we are entering the most active and crucial period of the primary
fight. There are less than four months between today and the Iowa caucuses. This is the time when the candidates need
to be on the top of their games. When they need to be able to go into absolute
overdrive in terms of their campaigning, fundraising etc. Not a time when you
change the "nature" (in Sanders' words) of the sort of campaign you
are running.
Sensing that the Sanders statement about scaling back wasn't going over
well, campaign manager Faiz Shakir sought to put a brighter spin on things. "As
Bernie said, we are going to have an active campaign," said Shakir.
"Instead of a breakneck series of events that lap the field, we are going
to keep a marathoner's pace that still manages to outrun everyone else."
Which, well, OK. There's no question that prior to his heart attack,
Sanders kept up a hugely full schedule of events. Anyone who ever spent a
day or a week with him on the campaign trail always came back marveling about
his energy -- particularly given that he is 78. But again, this is the final
turn and sprint of the race. For example, Sanders is now skipping
Thursday's CNN and Human Rights Campaign presidential town hall focused on
LGBTQ issues. Ramping down -- even slightly and understandably -- isn't the
message you want to be sending to voters on the fence about who to vote for and
in the process of making that decision.
The reality for Sanders is this: His campaign was already struggling to
keep up with the surging Elizabeth Warren and the steady Joe Biden. This latest
series of events -- and his acknowledgment that he is changing the nature of
his campaign -- then complicates what looked to already be a difficult next few
months for Sanders.
Make no mistake: His hardcore supporters will be for him -- and reject
the idea that his scaling back will mean anything for his chances of winning. But
they aren't the voters who will decide the identity of the nominee. And
for those undecided voters, the last week -- culminating with the scale-back
announcement on Tuesday night -- might be all they need to see and hear to be
convinced that Sanders isn't their guy.
ABOUT CHRIS CILLIZZA ON THE POINT -- NOW ON YOUTUBE!
In each episode of his weekly YouTube show, Chris Cillizza will delve a
little deeper into the surreal world of politics. Click to subscribe!
ON THAT MISCHEVIOUS PUNDIT CHRIS CILLIZZA, WHO WILL PROBABLY IRRITATE
ME FROM TIME TO TIME AS HE DID IN THE ARTICLE ABOVE, SEE THE FOLLOWING. FROM
READING THIS, I THINK HE PROBABLY HAS A SENSE OF HUMOR ABOUT HIMSELF, WHICH IS
GOOD. HE HAS GOOD DIMPLES, TOO, AND SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD FAMILY MAN.
Enthusiastic, prolific, simplistic Chris Cillizza reaches new heights
By Lyz Lenz
JULY 27, 2017
Photo courtesy of CNN
CHRIS CILLIZZA MIGHT BE THE ONLY PERSON IN AMERICA who can have goofy
fun talking about Trumpcare, Russian election interference, and the emoluments
clause. CNN’s new political analyst and editor at large—long a punching bag for
fellow journalists who tend to be less adept at stacking up digital clicks—somehow
maintains an affable, enthusiastic obliviousness even as he tosses out
apocalyptic scenarios about the state of democracy.
Whether he’s on CNN discussing Medicaid, or chatting with you about
baseball, Cillizza comes off like a normal guy, your brother-in-law from the
Midwest, the one who actually seems to like you and won’t get mad at you for
talking about the Paris climate accord at Thanksgiving. His enthusiasm is
almost tangible: Do you like barbeque? He loves barbeque! You live in Cedar
Rapids, Iowa? He loves Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and remembers talking to
then-candidate Barack Obama there! And that’s the small difference between
Cillizza and a normal guy—he knows, loves, and obsesses over politics.
CNN is banking on Cillizza, the nucleus of its new multi-platform brand
“The Point,” as a simulacrum of an “everyman” who can reach out across the
great American political rift, needling both Democrats and Republicans with
relentless hot takes. That would be great, except Cillizza’s analysis—much like
cheese curds, the hors d’oeuvres of the everyman he exudes—is delightful,
easy-to-eat, yet often problematic upon digestion.
Why do so many journalists think you suck?”
Consequently, Cillizza tends to be a fly trap for criticism about his
criticism. The best recent example is the recent Ask Me Anything (AMA) thread
Cillizza did on Reddit. The questions were brutal.
RELATED: CNN’s pro-Trump posse clouds its journalism
“Hi Chris, I’m curious as to whether or not you feel your approach to
journalism can in any way be damaging to the public dialogue,” asked one user.
Another chimed in: “Why do you adopt such a shallow writing style that focuses
on subjective emotional reactions towards important political events and not on
any type of cognitive analysis that could provide further insight into current
events?”
And in a deleted question, later restored, journalist Libby Watson of
Fusion asked, “Why do so many journalists think you suck?”
Despite the relentless Reddit critiques on everything from journalistic
ethics to Cillizza’s supposed foot fetish (more later), Cillizza’s responses
were upbeat. Unconcerned positivity and genuine zeal are part of the Cillizza
brand. In responding to Watson, the critical journalist, he noted, “I would
first say that everyone—even reporters—is entitled to their opinion about my
work. If that opinion is that it’s terrible, so be it!”
It’s the shruggy emoji of responses—acknowledging criticism, but
also noting he has fans. Big fans. Fans who have helped Cillizza, 41, go from a
failed novelist and intern for the conservative columnist George Will, to a
coveted, high-profile role at CNN. Love him or hate him, people read him:
Cillizza’s Reddit AMA attracted more than 100,000 views and 800 questions,
making it a top performer for the year.
It’s the Cillizza Catch-22: Amid all the criticism, his traffic stats
are unimpeachable. Cillizza is relentlessly popular with mainstream audiences.
According to data shared with CJR by CNN, in the first three months of his new
job, Cillizza’s most trafficked column (“Donald Trump Just Held the Weirdest
Cabinet Meeting Ever”) drew over three million unique visitors. His other most
popular columns hold steady at between one and two million unique visitors.
Those are big numbers even for an operation that drew 105 million unique
visitors in June.
Chris Cillizza on set of Wolf Blitzer’s afternoon show. Photo courtesy
of CNN.
His newsletter, The Point, already is CNN’s second largest after adding
10,000 new subscribers in the first two weeks of July (CNN would not say how
many total subscribers it has amassed).
***
BORN AND RAISED in Connecticut, Cillizza’s father taught elementary
school and mother worked in human resources for an insurance company. In high
school, he attended the elite Loomis Chaffee college preparatory school
alongside future professional hockey player Andrew Berenzweig and MTV veejay
Jesse Camp. After graduating in 1994, Cillizza studied at Georgetown University
as an English major, writing short stories and dreaming of becoming a novelist.
In his sophomore year at Georgetown, Cillizza was recommended by the
dean of the college of arts and sciences for a coveted internship with
Pulitzer-prize winning columnist George Will. At the time, Cillizza wasn’t
interested in politics. He knew about George Will because of his writing about
baseball. Will is a Chicago Cubs fan who authored the book Men at Work: The Craft
of Baseball.
As an intern, Cillizza learned about civics, statecraft, research, and
the political act of car parking. Will drove a Ford Mustang convertible and
would drive the car up to the office so one of the college interns could park
it for him.
By the time he graduated from college in 1998, Cillizza’s career as a
novelist was going nowhere. “If you’ve never published anything,” Cillizza
quipped in an interview with CJR, “it’s hard to be a novelist.”
He briefly considered a career as a sports writer, but after a friend
interned at CBS, he decided sports would be less fun as a job. Besides, sports
and politics have a lot in common—history, personalities, numbers,
unpredictability. In the way he collected baseball cards as a kid and poured
over stats, Cillizza began pouring over the history of politics.
Through Will, Cillizza heard that political reporting legend Charlie
Cook needed some help at his newsletter. So he interviewed with Cook and a got
a job as a political reporter. Cook’s favorite “everyman” story about Cillizza
comes from the job offer itself, which came with a stipend for parking.
Cillizza misunderstood the offer and thought he was being offered a chance to
get paid to park Cook’s car.
Cillizza said eagerly, “Great. I used to park Mr. Will’s car.”
“No, Chris,” Cook responded, as Cillizza recalls. “We pay you for
parking your own car.”
***
CILLIZZA LANDED at The Cook Political Report in 1998, just as the
Monica Lewinsky scandal was erupting into a full-blown frenzy. Then there was impeachment,
the 2000 presidential race, the Florida recount, and September 11. It was a
trial by political fire, and Cillizza met each story with relentless energy.
The Cook Political Report, owned by Charlie Cook, shared an office with the
National Journal empire, owned by David Bradley, which encompassed The Hotline
and eventually, The Atlantic. The Washington, DC building hosted a group of
young reporters on the cusp of their careers—Eliza Newlin Camey, Louis
Jacobson, Siobhan Gorman, Shawn Zeller, Amy Walter, Mark Murray, and Chuck
Todd. When they weren’t working they
were drinking together or playing softball.
Cilliza has never been interested in appearing at fancy parties or
rubbing elbows with DC’s elite. Instead, he plays pickup basketball twice a week,
and he met his wife, Gia, on the softball field. Cillizza recruited her for his
team because the former scholarship field-hockey player at Miami University has
a competitive streak.
In addition to his wife, Cillizza met many of his lifelong friends over
softball. Lou Jacobson recalls taking dancing lessons with his fiancee and
Cillizza and Gia. Cillizza was not a good dancer. “At least he was better than
me,” joked Jacobson. Cillizza and Amy Walter sang the 1995 Rob Base and DJ EZ
Rock pop hit, “It Takes Two” at each other’s weddings.
Whether he was working on a story about Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson at a
Rock the Vote rally or a detailed look at redistricting, “he always wanted to
talk to everyone,” recalls Walter, who sat near Cillizza while he worked at The
Cook Political Report and often worked on stories with him.
Cook recalls that Cillizza was always motivated by his enthusiasm and
his love for people. It was also in these early years that Cillizza showed a
gut-level aptitude for the hustle. Even before the web was a regular staple in
political reporting, Walter notes that Cillizza was always following up with
sources to let them know when and where his stories had been
published—promoting himself and his work in a way Walter remembers as evidence
of an early acumen for building a brand.
Cillizza himself describes his enthusiasm as the “zeal of the
converted.” He considers himself a disciple of the Richard Ben Cramer style of
political reporting, which he defines as looking beyond the politics and into
what makes the people in politics who they are. In 2010, Cillizza was able to
meet Cramer, a legendary political journalist and author of the book What it
Takes, a 1,000-plus page look at the 1988 presidential race, who was living in
Maryland. Jack Bohrer, who worked for Cramer at the time and is now the author
of The Revolution of Robert Kennedy: From Power to Protest After JFK, got
together a group of young Cramer devotees—Sasha Issenberg, Jonathan Martin, Ben
Smith, and Chris Cillizza—and brought them to Cramer’s home on a political
pilgrimage.
Writing in his book, The Gospel According to the Fix: An Insiders Guide
to a Less Than Holy World of Politics, Cillizza notes that John Harris of
Politico called the visit the equivalent of a young Bob Dylan going to
visit Woody Guthrie. Cillizza went back
afterward and formed a friendship with Cramer that lasted until Cramer’s death
in 2013. For Cillizza, Cramer’s work, and their friendship, forged his identity
as a writer, noting for his generation of political reporters, Cramer’s What it
Takes “spoke to something elemental about why were were drawn to the field. It
tried like hell to get who these people, who were arrogant enough to believe
they among all others in the country should represent us in the White House,
were before they ever became bold-faced names.”
That interweaving of personality and politics is now a hallmark of
Cillizza’s style of writing, which often makes it hard to separate the pundit
from the person. Eschewing the dry, formal style of many of his mentors,
Cillizza wrote about Ron Paul through the lens of his favorite TV show, Friday
Night Lights, noting, “Both Paul and ‘Friday Night Lights’ have incredibly
deep but not all that wide bases of support.”
In a paragraph emblematic of Cillizza’s style, he wrote about Ted
Cruz’s endorsement of Donald Trump in 2016:
Ted Cruz called Donald Trump a “serial philander.” He called him a
“pathological liar.” He warned the real estate mogul to leave his wife “the
hell alone.” And then, on Friday, Cruz endorsed Trump’s presidential candidacy.
Er, what?
John Harris, editor in chief of Politico and a Cillizza mentor, notes
that while Cramer and Cillizza both saw stories in that intersection of
character and politics, Cillizza’s writing is “of the moment. So in that sense
they are different. But the spirit is similar and perhaps as Chris’ career will
develop into something more long-form in the future.”
***
AFTER COVERING CAMPAIGN POLITICS at the presidential and congressional
level for three years, Cillizza in 2005 became Roll Call’s White House
correspondent. By then, his fervent energy and penchant for breaking news was
getting noticed.
Harris, who was national politics editor at The Washington Post in
2005, remembers being aware of Cillizza because Cillizza was always breaking
stories before his team. “When the competition breaks a story, you usually say,
‘That’s no big deal.’ ‘We had that.’ Or ‘That’s not that interesting,’” says
Harris. “But sometimes, you say, ‘Dammit! We just got beat.’ And Chris was
producing those ‘Dammit!’ stories.”
Harris interviewed Cillizza and was impressed by his unique combination
of gravity and entertainment. “Chris is a combination between being a serious
student of politics with a level of depth and perception that is uncommon. All
that, combined with fun. He can talk about a serious subject in a fun way.”
The most recent example of Cillizza’s “fun” and/or exasperating writing
style was his use of a smiley face emojis, when assessing the Republican
healthcare alternative to the Affordable Care Act.
“Which brings me to a new feature I am going to do every day between
now and whenever we get a Senate vote on the health care bill: An emoji-based
assessment of the chances of the health care legislation passing,” he wrote for
CNN. “There are three options: 1) Smiley face (good chance of passage) 2) Meh
face (50-50-ish chance) and 3) Sad face (less than 50% chance). Every day I’ll
write a post with an emoji update of the bill’s chances.”
This attempt at light-hearted analysis of a bill that could have made
millions lose their healthcare (if it passed, that was a smiley face) was
savaged on Twitter.
Ben Dreyfuss, senior editor at Mother Jones, and others took to Twitter
to call Cillizza out.
So, Chris Cilliza has a new feature where the sad face emoji means
"people live" https://t.co/IViynQ9OtB pic.twitter.com/NVx7cMrluB
— Ben Dreyfuss (@bendreyfuss) June 27, 2017
Mac McCann
✔
@MacMcCannTX
somebody stop Chris Cillizza. please dear god just make it stop.
View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter
3
1:34 PM - Jul 14, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy
See Mac McCann's other Tweets
Of course, Cillizza was having fun with politics long before the
smiley-face emojis. He was known at the Post for distilling a week’s worth of
political news into a “winners and losers” column, and quick, cheese curd-sized
analysis on who had the worst week in Washington.
In Cillizza, Harris recognized a someone who could make politics
palatable, and in 2005 he hired Cillizza to start a blog for the Post. With
this move, Cillizza became the first person on the inside of political
journalism to make the web his full-time home. At the time, Blogger had been
around for six years and and WordPress for two. Matt Drudge was online, of
course, and so was Andrew Sullivan, Instapundit, and Red State. Ana Marie Cox
founded Wonkette in 2004, the same year Jessica Valenti founded Feministing.
And Gawker had been around since 2003. Daily Kos was founded in 2002.
But Cillizza was the institutional inside man and so, as he put it, he
“bought up real estate in a place nobody else wanted.” An early web gentrifier,
Cillizza tried to persuade colleagues to participate. They scoffed, so it was
solo Cillizza writing his now-standard rapid-fire, voicy*, political
analysis on a blog he eventually called “The Fix.”
The Post didn’t use metrics at first, and Cillizza believes if they
did, he probably wouldn’t have lasted long. But that lack of pressure allowed
him to experiment with his voice, style, and approach. A brand was born.
I have made mistakes. I have tweeted dumb things. I have said dumb
things on television. I will again say something dumb.”
Not all of Cillizza’s friends were fans of what he was doing. Louis
Jacobsen, a senior correspondent for PolitiFact, remembers being skeptical
about Cillizza’s move to the web, thinking he had taken a step down from his
job at Roll Call, and worried about all the contests he was running on the site
to drum up readers. Cook, taken aback at Cillizza’s informal style, told him to
ask himself, “What would David Broder do?”
In hindsight, Cook is glad Cillizza ignored his advice. “The world has
changed, and political journalism has changed,” Cook says in an interview with
CJR. “Now I think he’s in exactly the right place and coming across in a
serious but enthusiastic way.”
Cillizza barrelled forward despite the skepticism of his colleagues,
making himself indispensable to the Post. Reporter David Fahrenthold notes that
so many of the things that are now considered basics of political reporting at
the Post—quick takes, aggregation, linking out, social media promotion—started
with Cillizza.
When Harris founded Politico, he tried to lure Cillizza away from the
Post to work for him. Cillizza ultimately refused, a decision Harris chalks up
to Cillizza’s wife, Gia, a former college field hockey coach, who he describes
as a keen appraiser of the Washington scene.
Harris ended up hiring Ben Smith, who is now editor in chief at
BuzzFeed. Harris laughs imagining an alternate political journalism reality
where Cillizza had become an editor at Politico. But he ultimately agrees
Cillizza made the right call.
After he began at The Washington Post, Cillizza’s profile and brand
began to grow, and so did criticism of his work. In 2009, The Washington Post
canceled his comedy series “Mouthpiece Theater” when he and co-host Dana
Milbank suggested in a segment that Hillary Clinton should drink “Mad Bitch
Beer.”
Jay Rosen, media critic and professor of journalism at New York
University, is a relentless critic of Cillizza’s informal style of political
punditry. He believe’s Cillizza’s work weakens the country’s trust in journalism.
In 2014, Rosen described Cillizza’s emphasis on “savvy” journalism as a
mistake. He warned that the quick-infotainment approach to politics would turn
analysis into gamesmanship, cultivating a class of people who were just into
politics for the fun, rather than assessing real-world implications. Rosen
explained, “The savvy severs any lingering solidarity between journalists as
the providers of information, and voters as decision-makers in need of it.”
You could put a cactus in my job and people would criticize the
cactus.”
The social media back and forth between Rosen and Cillizza got heated
and eventually, Cillizza blocked Rosen on Twitter. He’s since unblocked him and
reached out to Rosen to collaborate on a story. Rosen tells CJR in an email
that he cooperated with Cillizza as a means to get his message out.
Other prominent critics of Cillizza did not respond to interview
requests. Liz Spayd, former public editor for The New York Times, was managing
editor for national news at The Post during the “Mad Bitch Beer” incident and
said at the time that Millbank and Cillizza had “crossed the line.” Spayd
declined to comment about working with him, but noted, “Chris was a creature of
the web far ahead of his peers at The Post. He understood that the battle for
readers wasn’t going to be fought on the front pages of newspapers.”
RELATED: How CNN is ‘future-proofing’ itself
The fight for audience has brought Cillizza to some ugly blows on
social media with his colleagues in the world of political reporting.
Cillizza says criticism of his work isn’t unique to him, but just
another facet of political reporting. “You could put a cactus in my job and
people would criticize the cactus,” he says.
As Sam Feist, a CNN senior vice president and Washington bureau chief,
noted in an interview, “Chris writes five times a day. There is a lot of Chris
Cillizza to talk about, to agree with, or disagree with.”
A few highlights (or lowlights, depending on who you ask):.
He wrote a second-by-second analysis of a handshake between Trump and
French president Emmanuel Macron.
In a piece on a weird Trump cabinet meeting, Cillizza wrote:
Donald Trump did something very different in his Cabinet meeting
Monday.
First, he reviewed the various alleged successes of his first 143 days
and made this remarkable claim: “Never has there been a president….with few
exceptions…who’s passed more legislation, who’s done more things than I have.”
Um, ok. While Trump has signed a number of executive orders and actions
— the most high profile of which, the so-called “travel ban” was, again,
blocked by a court on Monday — what he hasn’t really done is pass actual
legislation through Congress. The health care bill is tied up in Senate
machinations. Tax reform hasn’t moved an inch. Funding for the border wall
hasn’t happened.
In an article on Trump’s battle with Jeff Sessions he wrote:
“We love this job,” Sessions, seemingly unbowed by Trump’s smackdown,
said. “We love this department, and I plan to continue to do so as long as that
is appropriate.”
Um, ok.
As if being called out by your boss, who also happens to be the
President of the United States, isn’t bad enough for a week, Sessions took
another gut punch on Friday night.
Writing in defense of Ivanka Trump, he explained:
You can hate Donald Trump’s views on and treatment of women — and lots
of people do! But, to expect Ivanka Trump to publicly condemn her father or his
record on women’s issues is a bridge too far. It’s impossible for us to know
what Ivanka Trump does (or doesn’t do) to influence her father’s views behind
the scenes. And, because of that — and the fact that she is his daughter! —
booing her for defending her dad is poor form.
Oh, and about that shoe fetish. Only weeks on his new job, Cillizza
tweeted a picture of CNN Chief Political Reporter Dana Bash’s choice of
footwear.
Chris Cillizza
✔
@CillizzaCNN
.@DanaBashCNN 👠game: A++++
View image on Twitter
312
1:07 PM - Apr 13, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy
530 people are talking about this
Responses to the tweet accused Cillizza of voyeurism and worse.
There have been other social media dustups, too. Recently, journalist
Olivia Nuzzi of New York magazine called Cillizza out for his analysis that Joe
Scarborough might be running for office.
Olivia Nuzzi
@Olivianuzzi
As the author of the story, let me just say: no, he isn't.
https://twitter.com/cillizzacnn/status/889862995840573441 …
Chris Cillizza
✔
@CillizzaCNN
Don't look now but Joe Scarborough is starting to look like a
presidential
candidatehttp://www.cnn.com/2017/07/25/politics/joe-scarborough-2020/index.html
…
View image on Twitter
2,943
12:00 PM - Jul 25, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy
395 people are talking about this
When reached for comment, Nuzzi simply replied via email, “In the words
of Sean Spicer, my tweets speak for themselves.”
In response to all of this criticism, Cillizza tells CJR, “I’ve never
tried to portray myself as someone who is not human. I have made mistakes. I
have tweeted dumb things. I have said dumb things on television. I will again
say something dumb.”
But Rosen is not so easily swayed by Cillizza’s “meh” response. “I
think Chris would be smart to reflect on why so many people who follow
political news closely are so frustrated with him,” Rosen writes in an email to
CJR. “Maybe ‘I’m independent, I call it the way I see it, and that means
clashing with partisans who see only virtue in their side,’ which is the kind
of answer he would probably give, doesn’t fully explain it. He should treat
this as a mystery he is going to resolve.”
Cillizza admits the criticism does get under his skin at times. But he
finds relief offline—playing pickup basketball, going over sports stats with
his two young sons who are already fervent Nationals fans, and dining out with
his wife.
The key, he believes, is learning to separate the noise of the internet
with legitimate criticisms. “If I said, ‘The sky is blue’ people would be like,
‘Typical Cillizza!’ But there are people who are critical and sometimes harshly
critical, but in a way that’s worth listening to, I think.”
Cillizza engages with his critics with his signature brand of Cillizza
fun. When someone on Twitter made fun of his hiring at CNN, writing, “gonna pay
someone to hit me in the head with a brick and then just wait to be offered a
six-figure media talker job.” Cillizza replied that he was actually earning
eight figures.
Chris Cillizza
✔
@CillizzaCNN
Try 8 figures https://twitter.com/pblest/status/867509017437974528 …
Fall Curst
@pblest
gonna pay someone to hit me in the head with a brick and then just wait
to be offered a six-figure media talker job
https://twitter.com/cillizzacnn/status/867479361171189760 …
181
6:45 PM - May 24, 2017 · McLean, VA
Twitter Ads info and privacy
275 people are talking about this
The joke, as it were, took off. And provoked even more backlash. On
Reddit, Cillizza acknowledged he definitely does not make eight figures. But
the ire the joke drew highlights the tension between Cillizza and the world of
media.
Despite the unintended consequences, Cillizza continues to face his
critics, valuing a radical transparency that he describes as “showing his
work.” After Norm Ornstein, resident scholar at the American Enterprise
Institute and a contributing editor at The Atlantic called Cillizza’s
journalism “pathetic,” Cillizza reached out to him and they had a back and
forth that was eventually published on “The Fix.”
They never reached a resolution, but Cillizza shrugs it off: “You don’t
have to please people all the time.”
And who is he trying to please? Well, it isn’t journalists. In a column
in The Washington Post, Erik Wemple wrote that Cillizza is playing the long
game, growing a mainstream audience and building a perception he’s a regular
guy kind of political reporter and not a media insider—an analyst who can
appeal to both sides of a divided nation.
A representative of CNN took Wemple’s article as serious and indicative
of Cillizza’s focus. I almost took the article as serious, too, until I looked
closer. How do you know the article is parody? It’s a list, written
exuberantly, and the links poke fun at Cillizza’s own comments.
It’s the perfect example of being Cillizza’d—that thing when you can’t
tell where the serious analysis ends and the jokes begin.
Cillizza does come off as an everyman. Talking about BBQ and baseball
in our interview, the only thing that was omitted was apple pie. Walter
notes that the Cillizza you see on TV is the same Cillizza who sits across from
you at a table—same enthusiastic hand gestures and asides. Yet, this everyman
appeal might on the surface be idiosyncratic for his new audience— Cillizza,
after all, sports an elite education resume (he’s jokingly called his high
school the “Loomis Chaffee school for the rich”) and political insider status.
In his work, pandering to both sides is what Cillizza does well. He’s
been criticized for his coverage of Clinton’s emails and his defense of Ivanka
Trump. And while some media critics like Rosen would say Cillizza’s criticism
points to deeper media issues, Feist believes that Cillizza’s divisiveness
is indicative of his cross-party appeal. “That’s what a nonpartisan political
analyst does,” notes Feist. “He offers analysis and you are criticized by both
sides, and I would say generally that’s a good thing.”
Cillizza for his part is trying to move beyond these battles as he
moves up. He tells CJR he’s not interested in toxic social media battles, and
since moving to CNN, he’s unblocked all his critics on Twitter.
Instead, he’s focusing on the current moment. “My job is not to know
the future. My job is to say, ‘Here is what we know about where we are what
that would suggest based on prior knowledge, based on reporting.’ And when
that’s wrong, say, ‘Here is what we got wrong.’”
And as he tries to direct his political coverage into the void of
American political dissonance, Cillizza does so with his trademark enthusiasm,
transparency, and sports metaphors. Noting that he can be nothing more than
himself. “When I was younger, I would sit down to write something and be like,
‘Okay, I have to be serious now. This is serious.’ And politics is serious, but
there is also the sublime in politics. You have to recognize the ridiculous.
They go hand in hand. Often second by second.”
With this mix of serious and sublime, Cillizza is holding his own at
CNN. And his power to command an audience, whatever they may think,
continues to grow. Cillizza’s new brand currently encompasses an email
newsletter, and a several-times-a-day column, with much more to come.
And if he makes another mistake? Well, as Harris tells CJR, “When you
hire Chris Cillizza, you know what you are getting: Chris Cillizza.”
Correction: This story has been updated to reflect the correct spelling
of Dana Milbank.
ICYMI*:
Journalist skirmish in the Senate: What you should know
Has America ever needed a media watchdog more than now? Help us by
joining CJR today.
Lyz Lenz is a writer based in Iowa. Her writing has appeared in Pacific
Standard, Marie Claire, Jezebel, and The Washington Post. Follow her on Twitter
@lyzl.
ICYMI*
Meaning of ICYMI in English
ICYMI
written abbreviation for in case you missed it: used on social media
when posting something that is not new:
ICYMI, here's a link to her column in last Saturday's newspaper.
(Definition of ICYMI from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
& Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press)
FROM THE ARTICLE ON CHRIS CILLIZZA, CJR.ORG TAKES OUT AFTER CNN WHICH
IS ALSO INTERESTING. I GOT TIRED OF CNN’S SHOWS LIKE “CROSSFIRE,” EVEN BEFORE I
GOT TIRED OF PAYING $60.00 A MONTH TO WATCH TV. NOW THAT I’M ON THE INTERNET
ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY, I JUST GO TO THOSE SOURCES THAT I CONSIDER TO BE HONEST AND
MOST LIBERAL. DO I EVER GO TO FOX NEWS? IF I SEE AN INTERESTING LOOKING STORY,
I WILL, BUT OTHERWISE, WHY SPOIL MY DAY LIKE THAT? AT LEAST THREE TIMES SINCE
THE 2020 CAMPAIGN BEGAN CNN HAS SHAFTED BERNIE SANDERS, AND IN DECEITFUL WAYS
LIKE PLANTING A HILLARY CLONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO ASK HIM QUESTIONS. HE SURVIVED
IT, BUT IT WAS NOTICED. COMMON DREAMS CAME AFTER THEM, ALONG WITH HIS CAMPAIGN
STAFF. AS CENK UYGUR SAID ONCE ABOUT BERNIE’S CAMPAIGN THIS TIME AROUND, “THE
GLOVES ARE OFF.” I DON’T LIKE FOR SUCH SOURCES TO BE TAKEN AS GOSPEL BY THE
PUBLIC, BUT THAT’S HOW THEY MAKE THE BIG MONEY. THEY DO WHAT THE DNC AND
THE GOP WANT THEM TO DO.
COLUMBIA JOURNALISM REVIEW
CNN public editor: What actually is CNN?
By Emily Tamkin
OCTOBER 8, 2019
PHOTOGRAPH -- Ronen Tivony/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
WHEN I THINK OF CNN—when I watch it, or when I scroll through Twitter,
or when I think of what I want to write about it—I think of what Jeff
Zucker, CNN president, said in 2017: “The idea that politics is sport is
undeniable, and we understood it and approached it that way.”
I think about it when I watch Chris Cuomo bring on bad guests, and when
I ponder his half-comprehensible interviews with Rudy Giuliani or Cory
Lewandowski. I think about it when I see online skepticism over Jake Tapper’s
breaking story that the Ukraine whistleblower was a Democrat, and debate over
whether he should have brought on dishonest guests like Rep. Jim Jordan in the
first place. I think about it when CNN announces that they tried to get someone
from the White House or Republican Senate or House leadership to come on their
network but that nobody would—and when CNN is in turn asked why it has been
trying to get “reactionary liars” to come on air to lie. And I think about
whether at times like these CNN is adding to, not cutting through, the noise
and confusion.
ICYMI:
Alan Dershowitz and the wheel of pain
But I also know that that’s not all of CNN, and not only because the
analysis, during the day and in the evening, is interspersed with straight
news. When I covered foreign affairs for BuzzFeed News’ national security desk
(RIP), I attended the State Department press briefings. And I’d see Michelle
Kosinski, CNN senior diplomatic correspondent, whose questions to the State
spokesperson at the time, Heather Nauert, were hard hitting, pointed and
unrelenting. And I’d see Elise Labbott, then-global affairs correspondent,
secure in her knowledge of what was happening, so poised.
These beat reporters were well-sourced and relentless. They stayed on
the story, whether it was Russia, China, or the State Department’s reluctance
to be transparent with reporters. They weren’t trying to prove that they were
the most clever at asking questions or that they saw both sides of every issue.
They were trying to get answers for their readers and viewers.
I never thought that they didn’t get the stakes, or that they thought this
was some kind of sport. They clearly took their obligation to find out what was
going on and present that information to the public seriously.
The contrast now is stark. It’s not that the CNN beat reporters are
good and hosts are bad—many of the latter are accomplished journalists, too.
It’s just that what is mostly reflected on the screen—especially during prime
time—seems to be less news reporting, more punditry, more round tables, more
horse race politics, more talking heads, more interviews and interviewees
yelling at each other, more that makes the news more confusing for the viewer
(or at least for this viewer).
CNN is very good at focusing relentlessly on the screaming dystopia of
domestic politics. Sometimes I wish it weren’t, so we could see what it really
does best.
When CNN does break major stories—when national security correspondent
Jim Sciutto broke the story recently that the US extracted a top spy from
Russia in 2017—it feels like being reminded of something I already knew: that
CNN reporters are extremely good at their jobs.
I find myself wrestling with this tension when I write these columns. I
know I’m not the only one: Bernie Sanders’ campaign manager, Faiz Shakir went
on Brian Stelter’s Reliable Sources and expressed frustration that the networks
were more focused on politics than on policy, and that, on TV news shows, “it
tends to be a game”. (Stelter, to his credit, acknowledged that many viewers
agree, and that “the shiny object, the sensationalism, it’s a problem”.)
Sanders’ campaign’s answer was to start its own YouTube channel;
probably not the cure for what ails our news. But I share the frustration that
Shakir went on air to express, with the panel discussions, the talking heads,
the takes. And I’m as impressed with the reporting as President Trump is
incensed by it. (None of this is taking into account that there’s also CNN
International—that this is one media company that actually has staff working to
bring information to people around the world.)
The publication with which this phenomenon has the most in common is
The New York Times. There’s Bret Stephens and his bad columns and email
tattling and whichever White House reporter you’re mad at and calls to cancel
subscriptions, but there are also, undeniably, hordes of annoyingly good
journalists (including Jonathan Mahler, who got the Zucker quote). The
difference is that the Times is in print. CNN pundits are on your screen,
there, with you, and in your living room, and so the connection feels more
personal.
CNN is very good at focusing relentlessly on the screaming dystopia of
domestic politics. Sometimes I wish it weren’t, so we could see what it really
does best. What if, for every talking heads segment, there was a reported
segment? What if the hosts threw their shows over to the beat reporters more
often? What if guests who lied weren’t brought on again? What if people who had
worked on campaigns couldn’t be brought on to spin the news unmitigated? Would
more people watch? Would people feel less overwhelmed when they turned on their
televisions?
It seems worth CNN trying, at least, to make its news shows more about
news, and less about show.
ICYMI: “I
had to rewind this to believe what I was hearing”: The media’s missteps in
Ukrainegate
Has America ever needed a media watchdog more than now? Help us by
joining CJR today.
Emily Tamkin serves as CJR’s public editor for CNN. See this primer for
more information on our public editor project.
THE FIRST TIME I SAW THIS YOUNG MAN I HAD THE NEGATIVE REFLEX THAT I
DID THIS TIME, BECAUSE OF HIS PINK-TOPPED HAIR AND MULTIPLE EMBEDDED RINGS,
LEATHER JACKET, ETC. THAT WAY OF THINKING SHOWS MY AGE, I KNOW. IT’S A
GENERATIONAL GAP. HE CERTAINLY IS AN INTERESTING CONVERSATIONALIST AND THINKER,
THOUGH, AND I RECOMMEND THIS INTERVIEW WITH HIM ON MORNING JOE.
MORNING JOE
Cambridge Analytica whistleblower explains why he became concerned
Christopher Wylie is the whistleblower who exposed the Cambridge
Analytica scandal, and he joins Morning Joe to discuss his new book 'Mindf*ck.' 8:05 DURATION
Oct. 8, 2019
Comments
Post a Comment