CNN Commentators Worst Day Ever

Jump to Last Post 1-5 of 5 discussions (115 posts)
  1. GA Anderson profile image92
    GA Andersonposted 12 months ago

    CNN Commentators' Worst Day Ever—in my opinion of course.

    I was watching CNN's Jake Trapper and an on-scene reporter discuss the protests. As the backdrop video, (the location of the on-scene reporter), was showing live footage of fires and looting, they both minimized the police kneeling, (as mentioned by PrettyPanther -  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WFqP_Y … e=youtu.be ), as just a token, and in syrupy voices spoke to the anger and frustration of the protesters. (they were not showing the kneeling video). Except, at this time there were no protesters—just rioters and looters playing live on their screen.

    I saw the protesters during the daytime protests. There seemed to be almost as many whites as blacks. And there were signs and slogans. And they seemed to present a united, but non-violent confrontation to the police lines they were facing.

    That time and backdrop was where Trapper and the reporter's comment might have meant something, but all I saw during their drippy droolings was black faces, (ok. maybe one or two white faces and a few brown faces), scrambling, running, dodging police, setting fires and looting stores.

    CNN's Don Lemon did the same thing earlier. With a backdrop of rioters and looters on the screen, he could barely keep himself together as he dripped empathy for the "protesters" he was watching. In all the time I was watching CNN show live footage of looting, vandalism, fire-setting, and violence against the police, I did not hear any condemnation of it from their folks—it was all oozy empathy and sympathy for the "protesters."

    In my view, this was CNN's worst performance ever.

    GA

    1. PhoenixV profile image64
      PhoenixVposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      You ever see the movie "Hell in the Pacific"? The whole thing reminds me of that.

      1. Miebakagh57 profile image51
        Miebakagh57posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        I feel for the protesters(so I read) but I've not watch the video. As for the looters and the arsonists, let the law deal with them.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image85
      Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

      What was sad to me as a Christian was how quickly CNN made what was a special moment to me into once again a negative story.

      I don't know what was in the president's heart when he took that walk and held up that Bible --- What I saw was my bible held high in front of a house of worship that has stood in that very spot for a very long time. A church that just the night before someone made an attempt to burn it to the ground. It seems CNN saw little wrong with a law-breaking thug burning down a church. No there was no condemnation in regards to any of the violence or has there been on the loss of life that has occurred due to these riots.  The protesters have done nothing but unknowingly shield violence.  History shows that although these protests are meant to be peaceful, and bring about needed change always turn into riots, and end up with multiple damaged property, and yes death.

      No, Don Lemon was blinded to the violence and the lawlessness of this past week. He could care less about the harm that has been done to citizens due to the violence. All he does nightly is to push a sick liberal agenda.  Just look into this man's eyes, they're dead, they show nothing but hate. 

      Defense sec Esper just gave a statement in regards to no rubber bullets or tear gas was used to clear protesters for president's walk or was the helicopter a "Blackhawk". It was a National Gaurd Medivac helicopter.

      GA, do you think those that reported these lie will retract their untrue reports? Do you think those that want to continue believing those lies will stop believing them, and stop spreading those lies? In my view no, the damage is done, the new bit of hate has been eaten up and digested.

      CNN and MSNBC are dangerous, they do nothing but work to divide people, and spread hate. 

      Magnanimity may just be detrimental at this point in our history. Common sense may just be a better route at this point. This country is in trouble, and we need common sense to prevail.

      Esper statement
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCJyU_f-s0o

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        What does your common sense tell you about Trump's claim that he was only in his bunker for an inspection?

        1. Sharlee01 profile image85
          Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Poor attempted at deflecting.  As you see I was posting an opinion. As I said I could have cared less about what the president was doing at the church. And pointing out obvious bias of CNN, not to mention their proclivity to lie and distort the truth.

          I shared my opinion of Don Lemon, and his distorted hateful views and the fact that CNN distorted the fact in regards to Monday nights National Guards curfew showdown with protesters.

          I did not mention anything about Trump and the bunker statement or might I say "words". I was concentrating on deeds...  CNN deeds, Don Lemons nightly deeds... Ect.

          Like I said nice deflect, but there is just so much more going on right now that deserves attention than Trump's words... Hopefully, you are able to see all the tragedy through the media rant- TRUMP SAID THIS! People are actually dying. Cities are being looted and burned. I could give a care less about the rediculous statement Trump made. He makes many almost daily.

          Sorry, but at this point, it appears to me your concerns are misguided with all the tragedies we are seeing with these protests/riots.

          At any rate I could give a sh-- about what Trump said. Your comment is disturbing to me in so many ways. It's like when you see something you find really uncomfortable you just ignore the comment and quickly deflect.

          Just not in the mood for your  "fluff"... We have real problems due to these protests, and they can't be laid on Trump for a statement about a bunker.

          1. profile image0
            PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I was not trying to deflect. You seem to care deeply about the truth, and you often refer to your "common sense." I believe it is on topic to determine whether a poster who is expressing an opinion is credible in their use of truth and their self-described common sense. If the truth and common sense are only deployed in some situations and not others, then credibility is a serious issue.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image85
              Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Please keep in mind I was responding to your response to one of my previous comments.

              PP --"What does your common sense tell you about Trump's claim that he was only in his bunker for an inspection?"

              I went in-depth in my response to your comment

              You know come back with this...

              PP ---" I believe it is on topic to determine whether a poster who is expressing an opinion is credible in their use of truth and their self-described common sense. "

              The initial comment you responded to was clearly on the subject (CNN Commentators Worst Day Ever). I provided a link in regards to the latest CNN report that has been proven to be untrue. Nothing to do with my common sense other than I am opting to believe the Sec OF Defense Esper over CNN.

              And yes I certainly dished up an opinion. You don't like it, that is your problem. Likewise when it comes to me not appreciating your opinions. I must ask, why do you find yourself so self-important, to even have the nerve to question anyone's opinion? WE all have them, and I certainly don't question yours or find the need to.---I am pretty much going to say what I please, you have the option to report any of my comments if you find them inappropriate or better yet you can pass them by. Either way, I could care less.

              The comment you brought up in regard to Trump's bunker comment seemed ridiculous in light of all that is going on in the past weeks. Sorry for my bluntness.  Actually your Trump/bunker may be on the subject. The statement is factual, and CNN has dwelled on the comment for days. It was not fake news he did say that. But consider, perhaps I found it unimportant do to the nightly riots as well as deaths that have occurred due to these riots. Guess one could say my common sense did tell me Trump's bunker statement sort of takes a back seat to the violence that is nightly being perpetrated in our major cities. Call me crazy...   

              I have mentioned this many times before we totally have conflicting thought processes. I don't understand your logic or most of the Time agree with it. As it is clear you feel the same.Not sure why you waste your time responding to my comments. Your Wellcome too, it's an open forum, but don't feel I will not come back at you with my opinion. Plus, I must remind you, I really don't care what Trump says, I care about his job performance.

              1. profile image0
                PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                Never mind.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image85
                  Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Yeah, I thought that would be your reply.  I think I made my point. If I didn't it was not from a lack of trying.  Sorry, I am so over all the liberal BS.  Not willing to placate or respond to it anymore. Plenty here that feed on it, just not one that can abide by it.

                  1. profile image0
                    PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    You sure use a lot of words in your non-placating non-responses.

                    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … on/612640/

                    “I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled,” Mattis writes. “The words ‘Equal Justice Under Law’ are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.” He goes on, “We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.”

                    “Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us,” Mattis writes. “We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.”

                    Me: Most people understand that what a president says is an important part of his job performance. Most people understand that choosing to spread hate and glorify violence, from a position of power, is an action.

                    Continuing to support a man who does that while the nation is suffering is also an action.

              2. Miebakagh57 profile image51
                Miebakagh57posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                Trump should not got to inspect the white house underground bunker at such a time. His he afraid? Of what? I read some where else he went in with his wife and son. I think after that he came out strong weavinging the bible in front of a church. Whatever that means, he owns the American nation a special apology.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image85
                  Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  What was reported is that four protestors had breached the White House lawn and were arrested, and the first family were then taken to the bunker for their own safety Trump later said he went to the bunker to inspect it. I would only be guessing why he said such a thing. But at any rate, he was called a coward for agreeing to go to the bunker at the FBI and secret services request.

                  IT is well known many actually hate the president. I would think it was a good move on the secrets services part to take them all to the bunker. Lot's of violence was occurring on that Friday night in Washington.

                  https://www.businessinsider.in/politics … 186585.cms

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    It is not possible that rational consideration could produce the conclusion that Trump is a coward for allowing the Secret Service to do their job and protect the First Family from approaching violence.  Only hate and a complete disregard for truth could produce that kind of conclusion.

                2. Sharlee01 profile image85
                  Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  IT's customary to protect the first family if violence is occurring or if there are plausible threats against the first family. I do know the night they were taken to the bunker looting and rioting was going on.
                  I believe it was a precaution. It is well known President Trump is hated by many, I would think it a good idea to have his family and him in the bunker on that given night.

                  Yes, some promoted he was a coward for going into the bunker...

          2. Miebakagh57 profile image51
            Miebakagh57posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Shar, is the cnn video report a dummy or is it real? I've not watch the script. Thanks.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image85
              Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Not sure what tape you refer to. CNN has many on youtube. I don't have any respect for how they report the news, they continually misrepresent facts.  I like the full story, not one that has been carefully orchestrated to promote bias. Just my view.

              If you are referring to the Monday night tape from the Monday night protest. CNN did not show any of what precipitated the law enforcements need to clear the crowd. Law enforcement was being pelted with all kinds of objects. 

              I did find this video that indicates all was peaceful until the crowd started throwing projectiles at the law enforcement. It gives a good re[sensation of how the protest progressed into the need to be dispersed.

              The protest was not peaceful up to a point and quickly became unruly. To be fair ---I was unable to find any videos that CNN produced that showed the law enforcement being pelted with projectiles.
              Please watch from the beginning of video.
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpzobT-SsqU&t=439s

              1. Miebakagh57 profile image51
                Miebakagh57posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                Shar, you got me relieved and straighten. It is what is obvious. I am not a viewer or fan of cnn. But the wrong is done. I reason the law can catch up with the guilty.

    3. GalaxyAyo profile image60
      GalaxyAyoposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Thank you Anderson.

      Their lies and sentiments cannot get them anywhere too far.

      We shall keep watching their folly.

    4. Ken Burgess profile image89
      Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this



      Hi GA,

      I have to preface this by saying I haven't watched CNN, not in years, other than the occasional snippet from YouTube.

      Still, hard to believe this is the worst ever. ...ever?

      Just a SMALL sample of CNN Headlines:

      Do Trump's Russia remarks amount to 'treason'?
      CNN analyst: 18 reasons why Trump may be a Russian asset
      Trump Complete Patsy to Putin
      Vinograd: Trump an asset of the Russian government
      Anderson Cooper: Disgraceful performance by Trump during Putin meeting

      And on these Protests?:

      Anderson Cooper calls out Trump: 'Who's the thug here?'
      Trump supporter leaves CNN anchor speechless
      Don Lemon calls out Hollywood elite: Where are you during protests?

      But the recent praise of China I thought was special:
      CNN this week published a report copying almost word-for-word a Chinese Communist Party press release praising the People's Liberation Army's Navy

      I know you think watching that reason rotting propaganda allows you to get a balanced view of things.  But all watching CNN does is warp one's ability to rationalize what is really going on in the world... because everything they put out is fabricated to foment discontent.

      There is nothing objective or neutral about anything they say or put out, it is 100% bias, it is 100% opinion projected as fact... and even the most brilliant and aware intellects will be harmed by repeated exposure to such nonsense.

      1. GA Anderson profile image92
        GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        I hadn't thought of my CNN viewing for the purpose of "get[ting] a balanced view of things," I thought of it more as hearing what each side viewed as hot topics or important issues. Maybe that is just semantics, maybe both purposes are the same *shrug

        But one thing should be clear, I don't automatically accept either side's views as the facts.

        As to the "worst moment," you listed some stiff completion, but it was the visual circumstances of this "moment." They were showing a split-screen of violent rioting and looting in two cities—and Lemon and Cuomo, (or was it Tapper?), were speaking over those images explaining how human compassion demanded that we understand the pain and frustration that was driving that violence.

        They were speaking of the looters in the same terms as the daytime peaceful protesters.

        Maybe we should just work on a Top Ten list instead of a 'The Worst' winner. ;-)

        GA

  2. GA Anderson profile image92
    GA Andersonposted 12 months ago

    CNN's Don Lemon is still on a roll.

    After a positive Rose Garden speech Pres. Trump walks to the church that was set on fire.

    Fox news = it's a positive message to the nation

    CNN's Don Lemon = Trump is pretending to be a caring president. And he went on criticizing the president for holding a Bible, etc. etc.

    The church Pastor was on saying his visit was a positive and reassuring symbolic act. Maybe he should check-in with CNN before he says such things?

    Geesh.

    GA

    1. profile image0
      PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Did you personally find his comments on the whole to be a positive message to the nation? I take it your opinion differs from Don Lemon's opinion?

      1. GA Anderson profile image92
        GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Yes, I did take his message to be a positive one. Both relative to Floyd and the Rule of Law. And very much yes, my opinion is different from Don Lemon's. I didn't like/trust him before, but now I put him in the same class as Hannity.

        GA

        1. profile image0
          PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          So, Trump's threat to deploy the U.S. military against the American people sat well with you?

          1. GA Anderson profile image92
            GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Since I know he can't do that I took it as hyperbole.

            It appears we are still looking for perfection. I would be satisfied with just the effort.

            GA

            1. profile image0
              PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              I will not allow the standards to sink that low without protest.

  3. lions44 profile image98
    lions44posted 12 months ago

    Both the Pastor and Bishop were disgusted by Trump.

    "The pastor of St. John's also told Fox News on Monday that he was unaware Trump was coming to the establishment, saying: "I feel like I'm in some alternative universe in a way."

    https://www.axios.com/st-johns-church-t … 59bbb.html

    1. GA Anderson profile image92
      GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      I did see the pastor on tv following the visit say it was a positive symbolic act. Maybe he was in a corner and couldn't say anything else. *shrug

      However, since my original statement, I have now seen the "Bible scene" Don Lemon was referring to, and I was wrong in my view of it. I still think it was intended to be a positive symbolic act, but . . was done so poorly, (Trump's 'glass eye' again?), that it ended up as a political stunt.

      Pass the mustard, please.

      GA

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        I saw it live. Trump had peaceful protestors cleared out with tear gas and rubber bullets so he could walk across the street to a church that he doesn't attend to wave a bible he doesn't live by.

        It was shameful and embarrassing. A new low. He is a disgusting human being.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Trump had peaceful protesters cleared out?  Those would be the ones I saw on TV, setting fires outside the White House lawn, right?  It required rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse "peaceful" protesters.  And you think Trump ordered the Secret Service to clear him a path? 

          Pretty sure you know better; the President decides to visit a church and the Secret Service does what it is tasked to do.  No orders necessary, wanted or given.

          1. profile image0
            PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I saw. Did you?

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              And you saw Trump give orders to clear them out with rubber bullets when pleasantly asking them to move is all it would have taken.  Of course you did. sad

              1. profile image0
                PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                I suppose he had to walk to a church he doesn't  belong to and wave around a bible that he couldn't care less about, at that time.

                roll

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Are you now backing off your statement that "Trump had peaceful protesters cleared out with tear gas and rubber bullets..." as being untrue?  You don't have any reason to think he ordered the action?

                  You were just spinning known facts to produce another bit of "Trash Trump", even though completely false?

                  (You're on record as complaining that Trump did nothing to help stop the rioting - here he is making a statement and you still complain.  Is there anything he could do that would make you happy?)

                  1. profile image0
                    PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    "Are you now backing off your statement that "Trump had peaceful protesters cleared out with tear gas and rubber bullets..." as being untrue?"

                    Absolutely not. Did you watch?

                    "here he is making a statement and you still complain."

                    Did it help? How many days has there been unrest? Has Trump fanned the flames with his rhetoric?

                    Geez Loueeze. It is clear you will defend the idiot no matter what.

                    Joe Biden gave a speech today. Did you watch and listen? That is what Trump should have done three days ago.

        2. Sharlee01 profile image85
          Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

          IT seems once again CNN has skewed the truth.

          Statement from Chief Gregory Monahan US Park Police ---"
          “No tear gas was used by USPP officers or other assisting law enforcement partners to close the area at Lafayette Park,”

          video of the chaotic scene spread quickly on social media and news outlets, sparking outrage. On Tuesday afternoon, the US Park Police (USPP) responded to the criticisms.

          “At approximately 6:33 pm, violent protestors on H Street NW began throwing projectiles including bricks, frozen water bottles and caustic liquids,” acting Chief Gregory Monahan said in the official statement. “Intelligence had revealed calls for violence against the police, and officers found caches of glass bottles, baseball bats, and metal poles hidden along the street.”

          “No tear gas was used by USPP officers or other assisting law enforcement partners to close the area at Lafayette Park,” he continued.----To be clear: Monahan is claiming the protesters massed near the White House were “violent,” that they were perhaps plotting some kind of attack of their own, and that no federal officials whatsoever used tear gas to disperse the demonstration.

          Defense Sec Esper statement "No tear gas or rubber bullets were used
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCJyU_f-s0o

          https://www.foxnews.com/politics/park-p … s-was-used

        3. Tim Truzy info4u profile image98
          Tim Truzy info4uposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Yeah, the Bible was upside down. Go Trump! Maybe he should have called those officers that pushed that poor old man down in Buffalo to clear the street in front of that church.
          I watched how at the start of the protests in MN, one of CNN's reporters was immediately detained, for no reason, unless you count his name was Omar and he happened to be Black, while another reporter, who happened to be White, was not detained or questioned. The police needs to police itself, really.
          And Trump - well, he didn't offer up a prayer that day, but he calls himself the Savior of Israel. Maybe he should work on America first. But we are sort of revisiting the 1950s. Thanks, Trumpets.

          1. Ken Burgess profile image89
            Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this



            Punks (a very kind term for what I really think of them) tried to burn down the church.

            The point of Trump going out there was to show there was still some form of control in America, some amount of order, and that the Church was still there.

            I am sure the protesters were told to move on... they didn't... they weren't allowed to keep the anarchy going, the President's arrival forced them to go somewhere else... I am aghast!  How terrible!



            Because the 'old man' getting in their face and arguing/insulting(?) has every right to think he can do that and have no retaliation.

            Its not his responsibility... right?

            Its not his fault that he is getting in the face of those police.  He has no responsibility for his actions or the repercussions they may bring.



            I think we need to do away with all police.  The people can maintain order themselves.  The people can protect themselves. This is the 21st century we don't need a police force, or borders, or a military.



            Yeah, SMH...

            1. gmwilliams profile image85
              gmwilliamsposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              New York City now has an 8 p.m. curfew to "curb" the protest/riots.  Why lockdown the whole city?  An intelligent solution was to arrest the rowdy protesters/rioters & put them in JAIL.   Yes, the LIEberal  Democratic mayor is way too soft on the protesters/rioters.   If Giuliani was mayor, he would have CRUSHED the protesters/rioters, he would let the police DO THEIR JOB!!!!

            2. Tim Truzy info4u profile image98
              Tim Truzy info4uposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Nope, Ken. I know some very nice police officers. One of them is my uncle. We need the police. They just need to monitor their behavior better. My uncle actually reported a fellow officer for misconduct. Yes, there are better ways to move an old man than nearly cracking his skull.
              Surely, you must agree all police officers aren't saints, and all protesters aren't criminals.
              Likewise, Trump actually has good days. (You see, I'm not bashing our president.) However, his bad days are in the majority because of his own behavior.

              1. GA Anderson profile image92
                GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                "Trump actually has good days"

                OMG! Does the blasphemy never end?

                You are going to be excommunicated Tim. But no worries. Us sensible folks always have room for one more. ;-)

                GA

              2. Ken Burgess profile image89
                Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this



                True enough.  But I have no sympathy for anyone who gets in the face of a police officer and eggs them on, whether verbally or with physical attack.

                I would have more sympathy for a 17 year old, because at that age you don't have the experience or wisdom to work with.  A 70 year old looking for trouble deserves whatever he gets IMO.

                That said, the police that pushed him will pay a heavy price for their actions... loss of job and some jail time likely.



                Trump is an annoying SOB an arrogant egotistical blowhard, and this is about the 50th time I've said such.

                Unfortunately, there is no JFK or even a Tulsi Gabbard on the other side which we can rally around and support as his replacement.

                We are left with a senile corrupt creepy Joe Biden as the alternative, he got elected to the United States Senate at age 29, so for 48 years this relic has been creeping around in DC... he's not the solution to ANY of our problems, he has probably been directly responsible for more of them than anyone else in DC today.

                Yes, Trump's bad days are in the majority because of his behavior and lack of couth.

                But he is still the President, and unfortunately he is still better than the alternative we've been given.

            3. profile image0
              PrettyPantherposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Regarding the old man getting in the face of the police. Should a police officer have as much restraint as, say, a college student serving lattes at Starbucks or a clerk at the DMV? I've personally witnessed customers getting in the face of workers and they didn't shove them to the ground. If they had, they probably would have been fired.

  4. Nathanville profile image95
    Nathanvilleposted 12 months ago

    It’s not just CNN, the chaos and demonstrations in the USA is dominating and overshadowing all other news on ALL News Channels in every country of the world.

    1. GA Anderson profile image92
      GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      It is only natural that the violence would be covered everywhere. My point is about how it is being covered. In my view, CNN is covering the looting as if it were part of the protests and that compassion demands we consider the pain and frustration of reasons for the protests as the reasons for the looting.

      GA

      1. Nathanville profile image95
        Nathanvilleposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        I don’t know GA, not being American; I find it difficult to follow ALL the nuances in the current ‘civil unrest’ across the USA.

        I can only comment on CNN’s coverage of the ‘civil unrest’ as an outsider; drawing on my own experiences of demonstrations, protests, riots and civil unrest we’ve had in the UK during my lifetime (which have been quite a few) as comparisons to help me empathise with the frustration of the protestors, and be aware that there will be fringe ‘activist’ groups who (are in the minority) and who take advantage of the situation:  If that makes sense to you?

        Within the above mentioned reference frame; my perception of CNN’s reporting on the current civil unrest across the USA (as an outsider) is a mixed bag e.g. yes CNN has covered the looting as if were part of the protests in some of their reports (especially in the first few days of the demonstrations and riots); but at other times they have gone to great lengths to separate the two (especially in recent days) e.g. pointing out that the majority of protestors are peaceful and have nothing to do with the looters.

        Also, I don’t dispute that CNN may at times put a slant on events that’s not strictly correct (unbiased) during their reporting of these events; because I know that sometimes they do the same thing when reporting on current affairs in the UK.  Therefore, I don’t rely on just CNN to keep up to date on these events as they develop, I also view the situation as reported by British News Channels, Euronews and Al-Jazeera news; although at the moment the same story is being told across all these New Channels, so there is little difference between any of them on how they are reporting the civil unrest in the USA.

  5. GA Anderson profile image92
    GA Andersonposted 12 months ago

    That assessment is about right Nathanville.

    Previously, I would stop watching Fox at 6pm when the news anchors were replaced by commentators, and switch to CNN. I haven't seen CNN's recent days' coverage because of how pissed I was with their commentators' early coverage.

    Now, for me, CNN and Fox are the same—fairly decent coverage from their daytime news anchors, and very biased and spun presentations from their commentators.

    However, it is probably a good thing for me. Now I only watch either channel during their daytime segments. When the commentators come on I switch to the Science or Smithsonian channels. ;-)

    GA

    1. Nathanville profile image95
      Nathanvilleposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Your terminology of “anchors” is one I’ve only ever seen in American films; so my understanding of the distinction between anchors and commentators is rather hazy!

      At the moment, I think the USA is about 6 hours behind BST (British Summer Time) so I only ever see CNN between the hours of 6am and 6pm American time (12 noon and 12 midnight BST); therefore I wasn’t aware that there was a change of News format on the American News channels in the evening!

      In Britain (unlike newspapers) News on the TV is heavily ‘Regulated’ to ensure balanced and non-biased reporting; which (unlike the American TV News Channels) makes the News Presentation rather dry:-

      Below is a good comparison in how typically the USA TV News Channels covers crisis’s vs UK TV News Channels.

      •    USA TV News Coverage of Coronavirus vs. Ebola: https://youtu.be/B0NhA4oBGuc

      •    UK Ebola news coverage: https://youtu.be/Ub-R2pM5Ai4

      Also, Satire which highlights “The Difference between USA vs UK Ebola TV News Coverage”:  https://youtu.be/lAz-F1QnyCk

      I’m intrigued to hear how you (and others) mention a change in News format in the evenings on the American New Channels!  In the UK the News format on ALL British News Channels is the same 24/7, except for perhaps between 6am and 9am weekdays when it can be a little more informal.

      In Britain we don’t have anchors we have a Presenter in the News Studio and Reporters on Location; very formal.  And another major difference is that if a Presenter dared give his or her personal opinion then you can be sure the Government Watchdogs will receive numerous complaints from the aggrieved parties (the public) and the TV Channel get chastised for being biased, with possible fines and possibly be made to make a public apology; with a worst case scenario (which is unlikely) of the Government revoking the TV Channel’s franchise licence or Charter (if Government owned) e.g. BBC and C4 being under Charter as Government Corporations; albeit C4 (which is a maverick channel) has been threatened with police prosecution on a couple of occasions in the past.

      1. GA Anderson profile image92
        GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        The difference between news anchors and commentators is a simple one from an American perspective..

        The 'Daytime' news "anchors" are typically former reporters or active journalists, and they present the facts of the news. Of course, depending on the station's, (channel's), viewer demographics, some bias does enter their presentation, but not really enough to alter the facts.

        An example; Fox news Daytime folks might speak of the 'Great' May jobs report, and give it 3 minutes air time, and CNN daytime folks might say 'The' May jobs report and give it 1 minute air time. The facts are essentially the same and the bias is usually minimal—depending on their viewer base.

        But, come evening, when the commentators start, it is a different thing. Commentators may or may not be former reporters or journalists, but they are usually just personalities with ideological leanings that match the station's viewers.

        They are on to tell us what the reported "facts" really mean, as in 'you can't believe what you heard with your own ears', so I am here to tell you the truth.

        Using the same example as above; Fox commentators will practically drool over how very great news the May job report is because; Trump's greatness did it, the Democrats fought against it and still lost, etc. etc.

        CNN's commentators will, while displaying visible disdain for the report and with the appearance of sagacious wisdom, tell us what that same jobs report really means when you look at the "facts." It could have been better, or never should have been bad in the first place, because; Trump is an idiot, the Democrats tried to offer solutions but the Republicans just wouldn't listen, etc. etc.

        The worst and most damaging aspects of the "commentators" is that they are presented on "News" stations and many folks listen to them as if they were listening to straight-up actual news—because they are on a news channel.

        Unfortunately, I think these commentators are very influential with their general viewership because, generally, their views just confirm the bias of the listener. The listener isn't getting news, they are just hearing confirming opinions.

        If you don't get these evening "news" hours, you aren't missing anything important.

        GA

        1. Nathanville profile image95
          Nathanvilleposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Most enlightening and very informative:  Your detailed ‘factual’ explanation GA is greatly appreciated; and it does explain a lot.

          The commentators reporting in the evenings wouldn’t be allowed on British News Channels because it wouldn’t be impartial reporting, and thus break the strict Broadcasting ‘Regulations’.  However the main ‘non News’ British TV Channels, BBC (BBC1, BBC2, BBC3), ITV (ITV1, ITV2, ITV3), C4 (C4, E4, All-4, More4 etc.) and C5 (C5, 5-Star, 5-Select, My5 etc.) can present ‘Current Affairs’ as Documentaries; and in those Documentaries express an angle (view point) which may be considered bias by some.  Albeit, if they stray from the ‘facts’ too far, and don’t present credible evidence that can be independently verified (fact checked), then they become unbelievable to the British audience and thus lose their impact.

          Fortunately for nerds like me a reliable source for fact-checking claims in Documentaries on British Current Affairs is the ONS (Office of National Statistics).  Although the ONS is a Government Department, it’s one of the Departments classified as ‘Independent’ e.g. it’s not answerable to the Government, its only answerable to Parliament; and thus prevents unscrupulous Governments from tampering with the data, or trying to hide the data.  The ONS publishes all its data in the ‘Public Domain’ on its website; for all to see.  It’s thanks to the ONS that the Official published Covid-19 deaths in the UK are 25% higher than the Government was originally reporting, until the ONS published its own data.

          All the above mentioned British Channels can from time to time make controversial documentaries, although the two Government owned Channels (BBC & C4) are particularly good at riling the Government when they want to.

          The differences between BBC & C4 include:-

          •    The BBC gets its Revenue from the tax payer (TV Licence), whereas C4 gets its Revenue from Adverts.

          •    The Government Charter for the BBC is to give a specific mix of genre (for all tastes), that is almost identical to the ITV’s Franchise Agreement with the Government e.g. to create direct completion between BBC & ITV.

          •    The Government Charter for C4 is that C4 is prohibited from making its own programmes, and must commission the Arts world (the sector in society that is normally underfunded) to make documentaries and films etc. on behalf of C4.  In accordance with its Charter with the Government C4 commission more than 200 hours of documentaries every year.

          C4 is a maverick channel that gained notoriety in 1991 by broadcasting over three weeks’ programmes that were banned in the UK.  The Government did try to get injunctions against several of the programmes in the Courts, but failed; and afterwards tried to get the ‘Crown Prosecution Service’ to prosecute C4; but the CPS, after some consideration, didn’t proceed with the prosecution.  Alternatively, the Government could have revoked C4’s Charter, but it didn’t.  One of the banned programmes (that was quite explicit, graphically) was entitled “All About Organisms”, but was really about another subject with a similar sounding name!  C4 pulled the same stunt (for a week) in 2004.

          A couple of BBC documentaries with major impact in recent years include “War on Waste” (2017) and “War on Plastic” (2019).   The “War on Waste” was a short Documentary Series by the BBC “Naming and Shaming” British Supermarkets for causing over 30% of food to go to waste.  The criticism aimed at the Supermarkets was:-

          •    Their policy at the time of only buying British grown vegetables with a specific size range, that were perfect in shape; thus, leaving the farmers with a third of their crop that they couldn’t sale, and

          •    Dumping unsold food once it reached its Sale by Date.

          The fallout of the documentary series was to create ‘public awareness’, which in turn put pressure on the Supermarkets to reduce food waste.  And within months all the supermarkets had changed their policies; so that now:-

          •    The Supermarkets now include a range of vegetables in their stores which they ‘label’ “Wonky Vegetables”, at a reduced price e.g. the vegetables which previously they would have rejected from the farmer, and

          •    Now, instead of dumping unsold food when it reaches its ‘Sale by Date”, the Supermarkets now give it to charity e.g. to feed the poor and homeless etc.

          Below:  Short extract from one of the episodes in the BBC's "War on Waste" Documentary Series that had such a big positive impact on getting British Supermarkets to change their ways due to 'Public Awareness' and 'Public Opinion' in the UK:-

          Morrisons' Food Waste Destroys Farming Family: https://youtu.be/hhWj_qNkBLw

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)