CNN used to be o.k., but now they are ABSOLUTE GARBAGE!
" CNN Caught Planting Questions and Reporting on Debate Events Before They Happen
This screen capture was taken less 5 minutes after the candidates had stopped answering the "abortion" question.
For those who didn't see the debate, an audience member asked a question of the candidates amounting to "What will you look for in a Supreme Court appointee?" Before the first candidate was able to answer, a CNN moderator interrupted to ask the candidate to include his stance on abortion in his answer.
Video of the question is here on CNN's site for now. (You can hear Biden laughing in background at the absurdity of asking for an audience question and then changing it when it wasn't what CNN wanted)
This obvious manipulation of the audience member's question was made more understandable when I looked at the CNN front page and saw their lead story, updated before the question had been asked.
This could, of course, be the result of CNN having agreed with the audience member beforehand on what her question would be, and the questioner accidentally or purposefully modifying her question into what turned out to be a more interesting query. As all of the candidates' stances on Roe v. Wade are well known, CNN might not be going out on a limb by stating they all agreed ahead of time, but if that's the case, it still doesn't seem to meet journalistic standards. Regardless, it's a very revealing peek into the workings behind CNN's debates and reporting, and puts into doubt the value of audience-sourced questions. "
For those who didn't see the debate, an audience member asked a question of the candidates amounting to "What will you look for in a Supreme Court appointee?" Before the first candidate was able to answer, a CNN moderator interrupted to ask the candidate to include his stance on abortion in his answer.
Video of the question is here on CNN's site for now. (You can hear Biden laughing in background at the absurdity of asking for an audience question and then changing it when it wasn't what CNN wanted)
This obvious manipulation of the audience member's question was made more understandable when I looked at the CNN front page and saw their lead story, updated before the question had been asked.
This could, of course, be the result of CNN having agreed with the audience member beforehand on what her question would be, and the questioner accidentally or purposefully modifying her question into what turned out to be a more interesting query. As all of the candidates' stances on Roe v. Wade are well known, CNN might not be going out on a limb by stating they all agreed ahead of time, but if that's the case, it still doesn't seem to meet journalistic standards. Regardless, it's a very revealing peek into the workings behind CNN's debates and reporting, and puts into doubt the value of audience-sourced questions. "
Of course, they WEREN'T READING a SCRIPT on 9/11, right?
ENHANCED VERSION: News Reports WTC7 Fell ...
Couldn't be, right?
Time Stamp Confirms BBC Reported WTC 7 Collapse 26 Minutes In Advance
