When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party?

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Tea Party Express is not a grassroots group; it's a registered political PAC that funds right-wing candidates. And CNN is helping them.

When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party? | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

CNN, once known for its unflinching coverage of actual news events, last night decided to become a maker, not a chronicler, of news. When the cable news network decided to partner with the Tea Party Express for a debate among the Republican presidential candidates, it cast aside any ethical concerns a news organization might have about direct involvement in elections and active engagement in altering the dynamics of a political party.

The article goes on to state that CNN may be acting out of a sense of quiet desperation due to Fox News' ratings.

Frankly, I'm having trouble understanding where the line is. Obviously, I'm the opposite of a tea party supporter - but why is CNN wrong for carrying the debate? What am I missing here?

1) CNN isn't being a shill, they are actually acting like a good and credible news outlet with this debate

2) The tea party isn't extremist nor is the GOP, those are far left lies much like the far right lies of obama being a kenyan muslim, both just aren't true.

 

[saveliberty]

I got no problem with ABC, NBC, MSNBC or CBS sponsoring a Democratic political event. Oh wait, they did. Last Thursday.

 

[ogibillm]

i may be mistaken but i thought lots of these primary debates were sponsored by pacs and covered by news outlets

i do understand the criticism though. if you put yourself in a situation where you are conducting/broadcasting a debate sponsored by a pac where they in some ways control the questioning you are amplifying that pac voice - and i'm not sure that's a proper thing for a respectable news outlet to do.

 

[saveliberty]

i may be mistaken but i thought lots of these primary debates were sponsored by pacs and covered by news outlets

i do understand the criticism though. if you put yourself in a situation where you are conducting/broadcasting a debate sponsored by a pac where they in some ways control the questioning you are amplifying that pac voice - and i'm not sure that's a proper thing for a respectable news outlet to do.

No danger there.

 

[blastoff]

Tea Party Express is not a grassroots group; it's a registered political PAC that funds right-wing candidates. And CNN is helping them.

When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party? | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

CNN, once known for its unflinching coverage of actual news events, last night decided to become a maker, not a chronicler, of news. When the cable news network decided to partner with the Tea Party Express for a debate among the Republican presidential candidates, it cast aside any ethical concerns a news organization might have about direct involvement in elections and active engagement in altering the dynamics of a political party.

The article goes on to state that CNN may be acting out of a sense of quiet desperation due to Fox News' ratings.

Frankly, I'm having trouble understanding where the line is. Obviously, I'm the opposite of a tea party supporter - but why is CNN wrong for carrying the debate? What am I missing here?

Relax. CNN was just having an MSNBC/Matthews-like "thrill going up my leg" moment.

 

[Truthmatters]

Corporate media

 

[Full-Auto]

i may be mistaken but i thought lots of these primary debates were sponsored by pacs and covered by news outlets

i do understand the criticism though. if you put yourself in a situation where you are conducting/broadcasting a debate sponsored by a pac where they in some ways control the questioning you are amplifying that pac voice - and i'm not sure that's a proper thing for a respectable news outlet to do.

No danger there.

Look on the CNN site for any stories on fast and furious. You quickly learn they are DNC lapdogs.

 

[Sallow]

Tea Party Express is not a grassroots group; it's a registered political PAC that funds right-wing candidates. And CNN is helping them.

When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party? | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

CNN, once known for its unflinching coverage of actual news events, last night decided to become a maker, not a chronicler, of news. When the cable news network decided to partner with the Tea Party Express for a debate among the Republican presidential candidates, it cast aside any ethical concerns a news organization might have about direct involvement in elections and active engagement in altering the dynamics of a political party.

The article goes on to state that CNN may be acting out of a sense of quiet desperation due to Fox News' ratings.

Frankly, I'm having trouble understanding where the line is. Obviously, I'm the opposite of a tea party supporter - but why is CNN wrong for carrying the debate? What am I missing here?

The Tea Party is a large part of the Republican Party now..like it or not. They are "Kingmakers". And I thought it appropriate that CNN allow them a forum. In any case it yielded a very interesting evening. Probably not in the way the Tea Party had hoped.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Tea Party Express is not a grassroots group; it's a registered political PAC that funds right-wing candidates. And CNN is helping them.

When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party? | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

CNN, once known for its unflinching coverage of actual news events, last night decided to become a maker, not a chronicler, of news. When the cable news network decided to partner with the Tea Party Express for a debate among the Republican presidential candidates, it cast aside any ethical concerns a news organization might have about direct involvement in elections and active engagement in altering the dynamics of a political party.

The article goes on to state that CNN may be acting out of a sense of quiet desperation due to Fox News' ratings.

Frankly, I'm having trouble understanding where the line is. Obviously, I'm the opposite of a tea party supporter - but why is CNN wrong for carrying the debate? What am I missing here?

So you want bigger government, more taxes, more government spending, more debt, an unprotected free market, and to disregard the constitution and disregard civic responsibility etc...?

The Tea Party Platform of which you oppose.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Tea Party Express is not a grassroots group; it's a registered political PAC that funds right-wing candidates. And CNN is helping them.

When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party? | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

CNN, once known for its unflinching coverage of actual news events, last night decided to become a maker, not a chronicler, of news. When the cable news network decided to partner with the Tea Party Express for a debate among the Republican presidential candidates, it cast aside any ethical concerns a news organization might have about direct involvement in elections and active engagement in altering the dynamics of a political party.

The article goes on to state that CNN may be acting out of a sense of quiet desperation due to Fox News' ratings.

Frankly, I'm having trouble understanding where the line is. Obviously, I'm the opposite of a tea party supporter - but why is CNN wrong for carrying the debate? What am I missing here?

1) CNN isn't being a shill, they are actually acting like a good and credible news outlet with this debate

2) The tea party isn't extremist nor is the GOP, those are far left lies much like the far right lies of obama being a kenyan muslim, both just aren't true.

Tea Party Express is not a grassroots group; it's a registered political PAC that funds right-wing candidates. And CNN is helping them.

When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party? | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

CNN, once known for its unflinching coverage of actual news events, last night decided to become a maker, not a chronicler, of news. When the cable news network decided to partner with the Tea Party Express for a debate among the Republican presidential candidates, it cast aside any ethical concerns a news organization might have about direct involvement in elections and active engagement in altering the dynamics of a political party.

The article goes on to state that CNN may be acting out of a sense of quiet desperation due to Fox News' ratings.

Frankly, I'm having trouble understanding where the line is. Obviously, I'm the opposite of a tea party supporter - but why is CNN wrong for carrying the debate? What am I missing here?

So you want bigger government, more taxes, more government spending, more debt, an unprotected free market, and to disregard the constitution and disregard civic responsibility etc...?

The Tea Party Platform of which you oppose.

Like I said

The media and left have this web of misconceptions and lies they have woven about the tea party.

These people would believe that Obama is a closet muslim who wasn't born in hawaii too.

 

[BDBoop]

There was a time when news stations were just that, they reported the news. I would say a Presidential debate would fall in to the category of news. CNN did themselves a favor by hosting this, too bad the journalistic integrity of some of their "reporters" got back to the same ole, same ole.

I think Wolf Blitzer did a pretty good job moderating this debate. Maybe the writer of the article the OP quoted can learn a little something about journalism. Perhaps he's a little jealous he wasn't invited.

It appears he's a little biased toward the TEA Party and wouldn't even consider giving one member air time if he had a choice.

Against?

Don't know. I get his point - your point. I just don't get how giving the debate airtime = 'taking sides'.

I just finished reading Larry King's latest book. That may be part of the problem. He viewed himself as a conduit. It had nothing to do with him, and everything to do with his guests.

 

[BDBoop]

being overseas I prefer CNN for my news on-line. I wont go near FOX or MSNBC, those are entertainment channels, not news channels.

So - can you see my point as to the article? Why did he feel CNN hosting the debate was a Really Bad Thing?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

being overseas I prefer CNN for my news on-line. I wont go near FOX or MSNBC, those are entertainment channels, not news channels.

So - can you see my point as to the article? Why did he feel CNN hosting the debate was a Really Bad Thing?

I am really not sure either. I thought it was a good debate, i learned stuff and my opinion on several canidates changed.

 

[BDBoop]

being overseas I prefer CNN for my news on-line. I wont go near FOX or MSNBC, those are entertainment channels, not news channels.

So - can you see my point as to the article? Why did he feel CNN hosting the debate was a Really Bad Thing?

I am really not sure either. I thought it was a good debate, i learned stuff and my opinion on several canidates changed.

Thank you. I didn't watch it, but the recap sounds like I should have.

 

[The Infidel]

Okay, and since that's what I'm saying - can you explain why the writer of the article feels that CNN crossed some sort of a line?

Because they are bought and payed for.... this is a desperate attempt on CNN's part.

Not changing my mind about them.... they are hacks!

 

[Dr.House]

Okay, and since that's what I'm saying - can you explain why the writer of the article feels that CNN crossed some sort of a line?

Because people at AlterNet are idiots...

You're welcome...

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Tea Party Express is not a grassroots group; it's a registered political PAC that funds right-wing candidates. And CNN is helping them.

When Did CNN Become a Shill for GOP Extremism and the Tea Party? | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

CNN, once known for its unflinching coverage of actual news events, last night decided to become a maker, not a chronicler, of news. When the cable news network decided to partner with the Tea Party Express for a debate among the Republican presidential candidates, it cast aside any ethical concerns a news organization might have about direct involvement in elections and active engagement in altering the dynamics of a political party.

The article goes on to state that CNN may be acting out of a sense of quiet desperation due to Fox News' ratings.

Frankly, I'm having trouble understanding where the line is. Obviously, I'm the opposite of a tea party supporter - but why is CNN wrong for carrying the debate? What am I missing here?

What an amateurish-article.

That's like suggesting no one should cover KKK-events/statements.

How are people supposed to understand the ignorance-level of such orgs (like the KKK & Teabaggers), if no one makes any effort to provide them the opportunity to show-OFF their ignorance.



Killin' the messenger makes no sense.

Would that author have preferred FAUX Noise covered the debate??

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Okay, and since that's what I'm saying - can you explain why the writer of the article feels that CNN crossed some sort of a line?

Maybe you should consider the source? Just a thought...

I watched all of the debate and the after debate coverage. Although CNN didn't stoop to BSNBC's level by immediately calling the entire field names they did blast them plenty for their right of center stances.

....Much like the "conservative" response to Obama's SOTU.

​

 

[BDBoop]

Okay, and since that's what I'm saying - can you explain why the writer of the article feels that CNN crossed some sort of a line?

Maybe you should consider the source? Just a thought...

I watched all of the debate and the after debate coverage. Although CNN didn't stoop to BSNBC's level by immediately calling the entire field names they did blast them plenty for their right of center stances.

....Much like the "conservative" response to Obama's SOTU.

​

Now that, I have to admit, irked my tater. All those congress critters proudly announcing they wouldn't be attending. Oh, FFS. STFU, get in that chamber, and do the motherfucking job you were hired for.

Dumb fucks.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Maybe you should consider the source? Just a thought...

I watched all of the debate and the after debate coverage. Although CNN didn't stoop to BSNBC's level by immediately calling the entire field names they did blast them plenty for their right of center stances.

....Much like the "conservative" response to Obama's SOTU.

​

Now that, I have to admit, irked my tater. All those congress critters proudly announcing they wouldn't be attending. Oh, FFS. STFU, get in that chamber, and do the motherfucking job you were hired for.

Dumb fucks.

Before the speech I totally agreed with you, after the speech however it turns out those numbnuts who were avoiding doing their jobs were right...nothing new from the president.

His speech is summarized simply "Keep doing what we have been doing since I took office but spend the money at a faster pace this time" Oh and he had some passion in his voice during the speech that I haven't seen for a while