THIS is CNN's CHANCE

[Mac1958]

A little wishful thinking here. Now that CNN has completely pissed off both ends of the political spectrum (and I have to hand it to them for that), it now has a chance to grab everyone else. The plan might look like this:

Commit to, and follow through on, the following:

1. Provide the most accurate possible reporting of any given story without concern for which "end" it might favor. However, also commit to accurately reporting the other side of the story if there is disagreement so that your viewers are at least aware of it.
2. No endless, long form dwelling on a story UNLESS it's breaking news. If it's a normal news day, keep things going and don't get bogged down. Leave the minutiae for your website and Twitter and direct your viewers there if they want a deeper dive.
3. Guests and pundits are fine, IF the individuals are utilized because they are qualified and are not flamethrowers. Use guests and pundits who eschew hyperbole and distortion, and who can at least admit that the other side has credible arguments.
4. Add (or actually, return to) at least one "Crossfire"-like show, using the same kinds of contributors mentioned in #3. Give viewers a smart, civilized, intelligent, stimulating alternative to the hysterical, one-sided crap they get from other cable networks.
5. Then be patient. This will take a while. But your ratings are already in the shitter, so it's not as if you have much to lose. LEAD.

 

[theHawk]

A little wishful thinking here. Now that CNN has completely pissed off both ends of the political spectrum (and I have to hand it to them for that), it now has a chance to grab everyone else. The plan might look like this:

Commit to, and follow through on, the following:

1. Provide the most accurate possible reporting of any given story without concern for which "end" it might favor. However, also commit to accurately reporting the other side of the story if there is disagreement so that your viewers are at least aware of it.
2. No endless, long form dwelling on a story UNLESS it's breaking news. If it's a normal news day, keep things going and don't get bogged down. Leave the minutiae for your website and Twitter and direct your viewers there if they want a deeper dive.
3. Guests and pundits are fine, IF the individuals are utilized because they are qualified and are not flamethrowers. Use guests and pundits who eschew hyperbole and distortion, and who can at least admit that the other side has credible arguments.
4. Add (or actually, return to) at least one "Crossfire"-like show, using the same kinds of contributors mentioned in #3. Give viewers a smart, civilized, intelligent, stimulating alternative to the hysterical, one-sided crap they get from other cable networks.
5. Then be patient. This will take a while. But your ratings are already in the shitter, so it's not as if you have much to lose. LEAD.

Thanks, Captain Obvious.

So basically this is their “big chance” to stop being a Corporate Media outlet that just regurgitates the same globalist, radical leftwing propaganda that all media outlets are paid to push.

I’m sure they’ll do it.


Yea.



Sure.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

A little wishful thinking here. Now that CNN has completely pissed off both ends of the political spectrum (and I have to hand it to them for that), it now has a chance to grab everyone else. The plan might look like this:

Commit to, and follow through on, the following:

1. Provide the most accurate possible reporting of any given story without concern for which "end" it might favor. However, also commit to accurately reporting the other side of the story if there is disagreement so that your viewers are at least aware of it.
2. No endless, long form dwelling on a story UNLESS it's breaking news. If it's a normal news day, keep things going and don't get bogged down. Leave the minutiae for your website and Twitter and direct your viewers there if they want a deeper dive.
3. Guests and pundits are fine, IF the individuals are utilized because they are qualified and are not flamethrowers. Use guests and pundits who eschew hyperbole and distortion, and who can at least admit that the other side has credible arguments.
4. Add (or actually, return to) at least one "Crossfire"-like show, using the same kinds of contributors mentioned in #3. Give viewers a smart, civilized, intelligent, stimulating alternative to the hysterical, one-sided crap they get from other cable networks.
5. Then be patient. This will take a while. But your ratings are already in the shitter, so it's not as if you have much to lose. LEAD.

seems like the only audience cnn has are the worst this country has.

 

[August West]

seems like the only audience cnn has are the worst this country has.

Yep. They say that these CNN people read books and stuff. We saw the worst this country has on J6 when they smeared shit on the capitol walls and they wanted to hang Pence, Pelosi and anyone else who doesn`t goosestep.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

Yep. They say that these CNN people read books and stuff. We saw the worst this country has on J6 when they smeared shit on the capitol walls and they wanted to hang Pence, Pelosi and anyone else who doesn`t goosestep.

^^^^see what I mean??

 

[gipper]

A little wishful thinking here. Now that CNN has completely pissed off both ends of the political spectrum (and I have to hand it to them for that), it now has a chance to grab everyone else. The plan might look like this:

Commit to, and follow through on, the following:

1. Provide the most accurate possible reporting of any given story without concern for which "end" it might favor. However, also commit to accurately reporting the other side of the story if there is disagreement so that your viewers are at least aware of it.
2. No endless, long form dwelling on a story UNLESS it's breaking news. If it's a normal news day, keep things going and don't get bogged down. Leave the minutiae for your website and Twitter and direct your viewers there if they want a deeper dive.
3. Guests and pundits are fine, IF the individuals are utilized because they are qualified and are not flamethrowers. Use guests and pundits who eschew hyperbole and distortion, and who can at least admit that the other side has credible arguments.
4. Add (or actually, return to) at least one "Crossfire"-like show, using the same kinds of contributors mentioned in #3. Give viewers a smart, civilized, intelligent, stimulating alternative to the hysterical, one-sided crap they get from other cable networks.
5. Then be patient. This will take a while. But your ratings are already in the shitter, so it's not as if you have much to lose. LEAD.

Dream on. No where in TV News does this structure exist.

 

[JoeB131]

It's like CNN didn't learn a thing from 2016.

By giving Trump an unchallenged forum to spread his nonsense, they legitimized it in 2016.

Who wants to listen to boring old Jeb Bush talk about Common Core when we can have Trump scream about Mexican Rapists! It's good for ratings and there's no way the Republican electorate is going to nominate this guys... oh, shit... well, there's no way he could slip past the archaic system we use to select presidents and get the job? Oh, damn.

Okay, now you know better, so instead of letting him have a friendly audience and pitching him softball questions, actually CHALLENGE him on his lies.

 

[ActionJackson]

A little wishful thinking here. Now that CNN has completely pissed off both ends of the political spectrum (and I have to hand it to them for that), it now has a chance to grab everyone else. The plan might look like this:

Commit to, and follow through on, the following:

1. Provide the most accurate possible reporting of any given story without concern for which "end" it might favor. However, also commit to accurately reporting the other side of the story if there is disagreement so that your viewers are at least aware of it.
2. No endless, long form dwelling on a story UNLESS it's breaking news. If it's a normal news day, keep things going and don't get bogged down. Leave the minutiae for your website and Twitter and direct your viewers there if they want a deeper dive.
3. Guests and pundits are fine, IF the individuals are utilized because they are qualified and are not flamethrowers. Use guests and pundits who eschew hyperbole and distortion, and who can at least admit that the other side has credible arguments.
4. Add (or actually, return to) at least one "Crossfire"-like show, using the same kinds of contributors mentioned in #3. Give viewers a smart, civilized, intelligent, stimulating alternative to the hysterical, one-sided crap they get from other cable networks.
5. Then be patient. This will take a while. But your ratings are already in the shitter, so it's not as if you have much to lose. LEAD.

I mainly agree with your very first sentence. I, too, wish a mainstream “news” source would get serious about reporting the news in an unbiased manner, but I'll bet a thousand that CNN ain't gonna be the first to give it a go. They're too entrenched in the Democrat, political muck and mire and will never change.

In the meantime, I believe NTD is our best source for unbiased news reporting.

 

[theHawk]

It's like CNN didn't learn a thing from 2016.

By giving Trump an unchallenged forum to spread his nonsense, they legitimized it in 2016.

Who wants to listen to boring old Jeb Bush talk about Common Core when we can have Trump scream about Mexican Rapists! It's good for ratings and there's no way the Republican electorate is going to nominate this guys... oh, shit... well, there's no way he could slip past the archaic system we use to select presidents and get the job? Oh, damn.

Okay, now you know better, so instead of letting him have a friendly audience and pitching him softball questions, actually CHALLENGE him on his lies.

Yea, how dare the media give the leading candidates a forum to voice their opinions and policies.

We wouldn’t want Americans to make an informed decision.

 

[Mac1958]

Dream on. No where in TV News does this structure exist.

Correct.

 

[JoeB131]

Yea, how dare the media give the leading candidates a forum to voice their opinions and policies.

We wouldn’t want Americans to make an informed decision.

When he gets up there and lies blatantly, um, no, he doesn't get the pass.

 

[ActionJackson]

When he gets up there and lies blatantly, um, no, he doesn't get the pass.

Sorry, but the hostess was a she ... not a he.

 

[theHawk]

When he gets up there and lies blatantly, um, no, he doesn't get the pass.

If he was lying, it should be easy to defeat him in a debate. That is the point of having free speech.

The fact that your side cannot win any argument on the issues point for point, might mean your side is the one that is lying.

 

[JoeB131]

If he was lying, it should be easy to defeat him in a debate. That is the point of having free speech.

Except it wasn't a debate. He was just allowed to lie without challenge.

 

[Mac-7]

A little wishful thinking here. Now that CNN has completely pissed off both ends of the political spectrum (and I have to hand it to them for that), it now has a chance to grab everyone else. The plan might look like this:

Commit to, and follow through on, the following:

1. Provide the most accurate possible reporting of any given story without concern for which "end" it might favor. However, also commit to accurately reporting the other side of the story if there is disagreement so that your viewers are at least aware of it.
2. No endless, long form dwelling on a story UNLESS it's breaking news. If it's a normal news day, keep things going and don't get bogged down. Leave the minutiae for your website and Twitter and direct your viewers there if they want a deeper dive.
3. Guests and pundits are fine, IF the individuals are utilized because they are qualified and are not flamethrowers. Use guests and pundits who eschew hyperbole and distortion, and who can at least admit that the other side has credible arguments.
4. Add (or actually, return to) at least one "Crossfire"-like show, using the same kinds of contributors mentioned in #3. Give viewers a smart, civilized, intelligent, stimulating alternative to the hysterical, one-sided crap they get from other cable networks.
5. Then be patient. This will take a while. But your ratings are already in the shitter, so it's not as if you have much to lose. LEAD.

As long as CNN has mac1958 they dont need anyone else

 

[theHawk]

Except it wasn't a debate. He was just allowed to lie without challenge.

I see, so Joe Biden wanted to debate him but CNN refused.

 

[JoeB131]

I see, so Joe Biden wanted to debate him but CNN refused.

Not Joe Biden's job to challenge Trump's lies, it was the journalist's job.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

A little wishful thinking here. Now that CNN has completely pissed off both ends of the political spectrum (and I have to hand it to them for that), it now has a chance to grab everyone else. The plan might look like this:

Commit to, and follow through on, the following:

1. Provide the most accurate possible reporting of any given story without concern for which "end" it might favor. However, also commit to accurately reporting the other side of the story if there is disagreement so that your viewers are at least aware of it.
2. No endless, long form dwelling on a story UNLESS it's breaking news. If it's a normal news day, keep things going and don't get bogged down. Leave the minutiae for your website and Twitter and direct your viewers there if they want a deeper dive.
3. Guests and pundits are fine, IF the individuals are utilized because they are qualified and are not flamethrowers. Use guests and pundits who eschew hyperbole and distortion, and who can at least admit that the other side has credible arguments.
4. Add (or actually, return to) at least one "Crossfire"-like show, using the same kinds of contributors mentioned in #3. Give viewers a smart, civilized, intelligent, stimulating alternative to the hysterical, one-sided crap they get from other cable networks.
5. Then be patient. This will take a while. But your ratings are already in the shitter, so it's not as if you have much to lose. LEAD.

After many decades of those pointing out the problems with the media it is looking like payday...good post.

 

[theHawk]

Not Joe Biden's job to challenge Trump's lies, it was the journalist's job.

How’d that work out?

 

[toobfreak]

Thanks, Captain Obvious. So basically this is their “big chance” to stop being a Corporate Media outlet that just regurgitates the same globalist, radical leftwing propaganda that all media outlets are paid to push.

Notice how Mac The Lefty worries about redeeming CNN from the hellhole they've dug for themselves while rooting for the demise of Fox News over unproven lies about a company that keeps everything about itself secret clapping because they settled out of court for half what had been sought.