Posts tagged cnn has achieved something truly remarkable: publishing 3,260 words on a subject without saying anything new. It is about the GOP’s many challenges, and I would bet any amount of money that it originated from a slew of press releases from that membership group of Republicans who are young. Read it here, or, preferably, don’t.

Today in “Might as well burn all the journalism schools to the ground.”

Today in “Might as well burn all the journalism schools to the ground.”

Journalism school, you guise.

Journalism school, you guise.

We also spent a great deal of time analyzing how we utilize and deploy photojournalists across all of our locations in the U.S. […] We looked at the impact of user-generated content and social media, CNN iReporters and of course our affiliate contributions in breaking news. Consumer and pro-sumer technologies are simpler and more accessible. Small cameras are now high broadcast quality. More of this technology is inthe hands of more people. After completing this analysis, CNN determined that some photojournalists will be departing the company.
Jack Womack, CNN’s SVP of domestic news operations, in a memo to staff announcing 50 layoffs at the news organization. Among those fired were about a dozen photographers. Womack suggests that User Generated Content via iReport, and improving cameras used to capture images, made the photojournalists obsolete.
Two of the fundamental attributes of good journalism are curiosity and a respect for the people on whom you report. Burnett got an “F” on both those counts with her Occupy Wall Street piece. Not only didn’t she listen hard enough to learn anything from the people in the group, she and her producers positioned the speakers to be seen as objects of derision. That is deplorable.
The Baltimore Sun columnist David Zurawik on Erin Burnett’s coverage of Occupy Wall Street for CNN.
Neither party is budging on its demands, huh CNN. Well, that’s some bullshit, says TPM editor John Marshall.

Neither party is budging on its demands, huh CNN. Well, that’s some bullshit, says TPM editor John Marshall.


CNN’s “Let’s Leave it There” Problem

Via Jay Rosen:

The problem is this: CNN thinks of itself as the “straight down the middle” network, the non-partisan alternative, the one that isn’t Left and isn’t Right. But defining itself as “not MSNBC” and “not Fox” begs the question of what CNN actually is. To the people who run it, the answer is obvious: real journalism! That’s what CNN is. Or as they used to say, “the news is the star.”

Right. But too often, on-air hosts for the network will let someone from one side of a dispute describe the world their way, then let the other side describe the world their way, and when the two worlds, so described, turn out to be incommensurate or even polar opposites, what happens?… CNN leaves it there. Viewers are left stranded and helpless. The network appears to inform them that there is no truth, only partisan bull. Is that real journalism? No. But it is tantalizingly close to the opposite of real journalism. Repeat it enough, and this pattern threatens to become the network’s brand, which is exactly what Stewart was pointing out…

…Meaning: You can’t keep “leaving it there” and claim to be the one dedicated to real journalism. You can’t have a “he said, she said” brand and yet stand out as the quality network. That doesn’t work. But it’s easy to delude yourself into thinking that it kinda sorta works because journalists in the U.S. are trained to believe that “not ideological” means…. good!

Somewhat related: Way, way back in 2009 Michael Hirschorn summed up the decade for New York Magazine by observing that we live in “a media age that lacks a central authority to referee reality.”

The observation was neutral and intended as a starting point to explore how we win and lose in a roiling media landscape where there’s no longer a there, there.

Which is precisely where Rosen contends CNN leaves things.

"Forget neutral — create a new identity"

squashed wrote:

This is Michael Calderone of Politico’s advice for CNN. In the past, I’ve been nearly as critical of CNN as I have been of Politico. He thinks that CNN should jettison its past efforts at objectivity and become another MSNBC or Fox.

What a horrible suggestion. CNN sometimes fails at its objectivity—but at least it tries. Would striving to be a network of partisan hacks be profitable? Maybe. If they don’t consider themselves journalists. But if they only care about profit, shouldn’t they choose a different industry?

“Forget news — become a bank.”

Calderone’s sole reason for existing at Politico is to think things like that. And I can understand how CNN’s approach to reporting news in as objective a manner as possible is infuriating to other outlets that don’t even bother faking it. Maintaining a high degree of objectivity is hard, and it’s rarely profitable. It’s more of a service than it is a business model. And how exactly does Calderone’s opinion column get filed under “news” on Politico in the first place?

Fortunately, I expect the brass at CNN are too busy trying to report objectively to put much thought behind what Calderone and his ilk are writing. The network isn’t going away anytime soon.