First sit down interview should have been on Hot Ones.
I think that would be just perfect. We can dream
Going cable was a bad call, and a totally unnecessary risk. I know the networks don’t have the same cache they used to, but it should have been PBS, NBC, CBS, or ABC.
I agree.
If only there was a button to show that.
What's the functional difference?
Functionally? There’s no difference, other than it’s a paid subscription channel. Practically, politically, and civically, network television has long accepted that it doesn’t make a profit from its news programming, so there’s a much stronger incentive to be calm, non-sensationalist, and to focus on important things that people care about. The only thing CNN cares about is ratings and profits.
CNN is free to stream these days without a cable subscription in the US.
I do it on Roku pretty often.
network television has long accepted that it doesn’t make a profit from its news programming
WDYM? They're all making money through sponsorships. Even PBS Newshour has sponsors for their segments.
They all help pay for their programming with advertising, definitely, but the networks’ motive isn’t to achieve the highest possible profits with their news productions, because news is just one part of their lineup. It would never be profitable on its own for them. CNN is only news, so their programming naturally ends up being more friendly to corporations and other interests that might benefit their bottom line, but not necessarily the public good.
You mean the same CNN that gave Trump and his cronies an unfiltered propaganda platform since 2015? The same CNN that allowed Trump to spray with a garden hose of lies and never had courage to correct him? The same CNN that as recently as last week got caught parading a Trump voter as “undecided voter” to legitimize trumps failing campaign for $$$?
Wow. Who would’ve thought!
CNN is owned by conservative billionaire John Malone, one of the largest landlords in the world. An example of its right-wing bias is when they put an obvious Trump Supporter on their recent panel of 'undecided voters'.
According to Parker Molloy from The New Republic, this isn't "an isolated case of questionable representation in CNN’s voter panels. In fact, it appears to be part of a troubling pattern stretching back years." She suggests it could be "a potential willingness to mislead viewers for the sake of compelling television." - media ownership and their profit motive, and complicity of the media elite are the first and third filters of the propaganda model.
Harris and Walz picking CNN is futher evidence that the the Democrats are not a left-wing party.
futher evidence that the the Democrats are not a left-wing party
It's not really a matter of them being a left-wing party; they're the left-est wing party we have as a realistic option.
I'm not trying to have a discussion about electoral politics.
I'm pointing out that the American window of respectable political discourse is shifted dangerously to the right, and that gives fascist candidates like Trump a foothold, while Eisenhower Republicans like Bernie Sanders are popularly viewed as extremists.
The Democrats should not be viewed as saviors in this situation, they are complicit in the fascist collapse of the United States political system. It may survive this election, but the catastrophes created by capitalism can't be solved by capitalist solutions. As long as the political system is incapable of real democracy, authoritarian populists will always be a threat.
One of the disgusting aspects of Trump's rise to power is the rehabilitation of former Republican presidents' legacies. Once faced with a terrible enough alternative, George Bush looks less like the terrible monster he was to those who allow themselves to acclimate to the new normal.
Imagine Trump is defeated, disgraced, and jailed. Do you think the vacuum he leaves in the political system will remain unfilled? What if that space was filled by a more competent fascist? Will people look back on Trump the way some do at Bush and say, "It's true he was a fascist, but at least he hardly got anything done."
Harris and Walz picking CNN is futher evidence that the the Democrats are not a left-wing party.
They were never regarded as left wing outside of the US.
but.. but.. everyone on Facebook tells me it's indoctrinating me with MARXISM
This is frankly pretty dumb on their part imo. They've got a good thing going, why risk fucking it up with an ambush interview?
They're supposed to just hide from the press until November?
They’re basically republicans in your mind so what’s the difference?
Settle your past idolatry before acting like
your posts are even handed…
I'd say the same thing if Trump refused to do press interviews. Demand more from our politicians.
They're not hiding, they invite the press to all their events and just had a gigantic four day live action press release.
Whatever they're doing is working; the debate will be in a week and will dominate the press; they have been very good at ignoring DC insider bullshit and "waaaah I'm not being treated as important by the candidate she needs to come flatter my ego" is consummate DC insider bullshit.
Today I saw Walz in a kind of interview where he took a moment to talk about house gutter cleaning this time of year. Seems like he's a big supporter of gutter helmets.
Finally! About time.
A bit ironic that they picked the one network outside of Fox News that seemed the most incensed that they wouldn't speak with the press. Or maybe poetic.
::: spoiler Daily Beast - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Daily Beast:
First sit down interview should have been on Hot Ones.
I think that would be just perfect. We can dream
Going cable was a bad call, and a totally unnecessary risk. I know the networks don’t have the same cache they used to, but it should have been PBS, NBC, CBS, or ABC.
I agree.
If only there was a button to show that.
What's the functional difference?
Functionally? There’s no difference, other than it’s a paid subscription channel. Practically, politically, and civically, network television has long accepted that it doesn’t make a profit from its news programming, so there’s a much stronger incentive to be calm, non-sensationalist, and to focus on important things that people care about. The only thing CNN cares about is ratings and profits.
CNN is free to stream these days without a cable subscription in the US.
I do it on Roku pretty often.
WDYM? They're all making money through sponsorships. Even PBS Newshour has sponsors for their segments.
They all help pay for their programming with advertising, definitely, but the networks’ motive isn’t to achieve the highest possible profits with their news productions, because news is just one part of their lineup. It would never be profitable on its own for them. CNN is only news, so their programming naturally ends up being more friendly to corporations and other interests that might benefit their bottom line, but not necessarily the public good.
You mean the same CNN that gave Trump and his cronies an unfiltered propaganda platform since 2015? The same CNN that allowed Trump to spray with a garden hose of lies and never had courage to correct him? The same CNN that as recently as last week got caught parading a Trump voter as “undecided voter” to legitimize trumps failing campaign for $$$?
Wow. Who would’ve thought!
CNN is owned by conservative billionaire John Malone, one of the largest landlords in the world. An example of its right-wing bias is when they put an obvious Trump Supporter on their recent panel of 'undecided voters'.
According to Parker Molloy from The New Republic, this isn't "an isolated case of questionable representation in CNN’s voter panels. In fact, it appears to be part of a troubling pattern stretching back years." She suggests it could be "a potential willingness to mislead viewers for the sake of compelling television." - media ownership and their profit motive, and complicity of the media elite are the first and third filters of the propaganda model.
Harris and Walz picking CNN is futher evidence that the the Democrats are not a left-wing party.
It's not really a matter of them being a left-wing party; they're the left-est wing party we have as a realistic option.
I'm not trying to have a discussion about electoral politics.
I'm pointing out that the American window of respectable political discourse is shifted dangerously to the right, and that gives fascist candidates like Trump a foothold, while Eisenhower Republicans like Bernie Sanders are popularly viewed as extremists.
The Democrats should not be viewed as saviors in this situation, they are complicit in the fascist collapse of the United States political system. It may survive this election, but the catastrophes created by capitalism can't be solved by capitalist solutions. As long as the political system is incapable of real democracy, authoritarian populists will always be a threat.
One of the disgusting aspects of Trump's rise to power is the rehabilitation of former Republican presidents' legacies. Once faced with a terrible enough alternative, George Bush looks less like the terrible monster he was to those who allow themselves to acclimate to the new normal.
Imagine Trump is defeated, disgraced, and jailed. Do you think the vacuum he leaves in the political system will remain unfilled? What if that space was filled by a more competent fascist? Will people look back on Trump the way some do at Bush and say, "It's true he was a fascist, but at least he hardly got anything done."
They were never regarded as left wing outside of the US.
but.. but.. everyone on Facebook tells me it's indoctrinating me with MARXISM
This is frankly pretty dumb on their part imo. They've got a good thing going, why risk fucking it up with an ambush interview?
They're supposed to just hide from the press until November?
They’re basically republicans in your mind so what’s the difference?
Settle your past idolatry before acting like your posts are even handed…
I'd say the same thing if Trump refused to do press interviews. Demand more from our politicians.
They're not hiding, they invite the press to all their events and just had a gigantic four day live action press release.
Whatever they're doing is working; the debate will be in a week and will dominate the press; they have been very good at ignoring DC insider bullshit and "waaaah I'm not being treated as important by the candidate she needs to come flatter my ego" is consummate DC insider bullshit.
Today I saw Walz in a kind of interview where he took a moment to talk about house gutter cleaning this time of year. Seems like he's a big supporter of gutter helmets.
Finally! About time.
A bit ironic that they picked the one network outside of Fox News that seemed the most incensed that they wouldn't speak with the press. Or maybe poetic.
::: spoiler Daily Beast - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report) Information for Daily Beast:
::: spoiler Search topics on Ground.News https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamala-harris-and-tim-walz-choose-cnn-for-campaigns-first-sit-down-interview ::: Media Bias Fact Check | bot support