OMG, you watched the whole thing? Thanks for taking one for the team. I could only stomach a couple of short snippets after the fact, and even those made me nauseous. Why is *anyone* treating this amoral America-hating thug like he's a legitimate candidate?
Can you explain why you believe a man who has been found civilly liable - unanimously by a jury of citizens in a court of law - for sexually abusing a woman is a legitimate candidate?
Andy, whether we like it or not, he’s a former president, the leading candidate for Republicans, and possibly a future president. He’ll be in Des Moines this Saturday and I expect many thousands of Iowans will show up to support him. To me, that says “legitimate candidate” who deserves, indeed requires coverage.
Thanks for your response - and to be clear this isn't about like or dislike - it's about no one being above the law. I disagree but appreciate it nonetheless. Also, would welcome a conversation about your learnings from 2016, KCCI, and the issues we discussed back then about a producer on your staff. Thanks again, Andy
Andy, apologies but I’m lucky to remember what I had for breakfast much less what conversation we had seven years ago! Give me a hint and I’ll do my best to respond.
I hope you send your analysis to all the news organizations that might be tempted to repeat CNN's mistakes. Also all the major newspapers need to print this. I also think the "not playing by the rules" is important to think about with any Republican who is following Trump's playbook. Our governor, all our Senators, and so on are misleading the public every day. Fact-checking is good, but not quite enough. They need a powerful, immediate push-back that journalists haven't found a way to create yet. The "republicans" vs "democrats" old way of weighing the truth doesn't work. There is a missing angle. Journalists need a "neutral" party that can say "that was completely false," "that was partially true, and mostly false" etc. There needs to be some emotionally compelling storytelling that is based on facts, that works on TV, other than competing cable news channels. Maybe someone in a mini-box like a referee truth-defender (like they used to have someone doing sign language.) And in the age of AI, this could be the newest thing! My imagination is going now... maybe an AI Truth Defender with a cape and a logo! :)
I didn't waste my time watching the CNN broadcast. Seriously, by now all journalists know who and what Donald Trump is. And the live broadcast, according to Dave, went as expected. So I'm glad I missed it. Some of the suggested rules of future engagement by news media make sense. But I'll skip those, too, and just watch the GOP Presidential debates next year.
I could take a victory lap as the town hall was exactly as I expected, with one exception. I did think moderator Kaitlan Collins did an excellent job of TRYING to fact check this serial liar in real time. I think you are being a bit too hard on yourself; you couldn't be that naïve about Trump as you now say.
I won't take that victory lap because far from the propaganda I feared he would spew, the town hall was so incredibly horrific for Trump that it hopefully shocked and reminded those of us suburban types of the disaster that he is. If he was a fraction of the "stable genius" he claims, he'd have moderated and perhaps moved some moderates into his camp. He's a "wack job".
It also scares me to realize how little I have in common with that audience and the millions in the cult.
Was surprised at your earlier column that CNN maybe was on the right track. Thinking maybe I should watch. Ahhh…thought better and turned on Jeopardy Masters. Guessing was not alone in that decision. Not to categorize Trump folks but wondering if a show like Jeopardy — just the facts — isn’t their type of programming! Just saying.
"Moving forward, all journalists must realize that nothing has changed with Trump. He’s not like other candidates, so the media can’t treat him like other candidates."
Dave, I think this has it reversed. The media in 2015-2016 didn't treat Trump like other candidates. They covered him like a celebrity then and enabled him to build the cult-like following. CNN seemed to go down that road again this week, although with an interviewer who would allegedly "fact-check" him. I would suggest media should cover him like they cover everyone else in the race, but they probably can't put that toothpaste back in the tube.
Your apology is refreshing. Something Trump (and most politicians) are incapable of these days. Good thing this train wreck occurred 17 months before the election, and few people will remember it or continue to be influenced by it. That leaves plenty of time for more lawsuits, investigations, and opportunities for Trump to do more stupid and terrible things that -- in a normal world -- would keep him from being re-elected.
Mark, I think this was one of those situations, for me at least, where enough time had gone by that the wounds had at least started to heal. Trump ripped the bandage off for all of us last night. A stark reminder that I hope wants any other media types away from repeating this disaster.
CNN promised to have a balanced audience. Watching last night's audience 'participation', I needed to double check recent N.H. presidential voting patterns, because one would have thought N.H. routinely votes R in presidential elections. Speaking of balance, other Presidential candidates will insist they have this free hour of publicity. CNN can choose to have a co-moderator in the future. CNN could do a fact check in the middle of the town hall; in professional sports, they routinely have replays. Also, CNN could permit a Democratic response to future town halls,. Dave is correct about Trump bringing out the worse in politics. What can of journalistic guard rails or buffer strips can be instituted to prevent everything ending up in the gutter.
Agreed with you last week and agree this week. I admire that you stuck with it. We left after 30 minutes and watch the new Ted Lasso to cleanse and heal. It proved to be therapeutic. Your suggestions to the media are good ones. I hope they take heed. Your candor and humility are two reasons why you remain one of the most respected journalists in this state!
A couple of other good suggestions from a friend who emailed me privately She thought CNN could have done more visually to fact-check Trump. Such as a graphic listing all the court cases he lost trying to challenge the election. Another showing the large number of rioters convicted.
I would add to that list: Video of the riot when he says they were all good people. A list of all the women who have accused him of sexual abuse.
Visually, that might have at least slowed him down some and interrupted the flow of his misstatements. Would I recommend that for other candidates? No. But for him, I would.
Bottom line, let’s hope last night is a wake up call for all journalists. We can’t have a repeat.
Well, that is certainly a view one could take. It’s a little radical for my old-school standards. In my years as a political reporter, I had trained myself not to personally conclude that any candidate was good or evil. I had to train myself that it wasn’t my job. My job was to report politicians’ words and actions as accurately as possible so that viewers were informed enough to make those judgments. I felt that if I made those judgments myself, it would inevitably show up in my reporting. I didn’t want to do that. I tried to stay in my lane.
That’s all idealistic, I realize. And I quite agree that candidates like Trump stomp all over journalists who play by the rules. So, new rule!, as Bill Maher would say. Exactly what those rules are, we’re all still struggling to figure out.
100% agree with that article. When the president promotes sedition and becomes a traitor and continues to promote that behavior he cannot hold office. In that case, everyone's role changes. Journalists must report the truth not promote lies, liars, seditious conspirators or traitors. They must inform people about them. BTW, CNN did not present a town hall they hosted - perhaps, unwittingly, a rally. I hope they have learned their lesson.
OMG, you watched the whole thing? Thanks for taking one for the team. I could only stomach a couple of short snippets after the fact, and even those made me nauseous. Why is *anyone* treating this amoral America-hating thug like he's a legitimate candidate?
I felt like I had to. Penance for last week’s column. It was painful.
Spot on, Dave! Now your next article should ask Grassley and Reynolds, etc. whether they still have their lips firmly planted on his a..
And Hinson
I agree with you, Dave. It was a disaster. Nothing has changed - he is dangerous and a menace.
Can you explain why you believe a man who has been found civilly liable - unanimously by a jury of citizens in a court of law - for sexually abusing a woman is a legitimate candidate?
Andy, whether we like it or not, he’s a former president, the leading candidate for Republicans, and possibly a future president. He’ll be in Des Moines this Saturday and I expect many thousands of Iowans will show up to support him. To me, that says “legitimate candidate” who deserves, indeed requires coverage.
Thanks for your response - and to be clear this isn't about like or dislike - it's about no one being above the law. I disagree but appreciate it nonetheless. Also, would welcome a conversation about your learnings from 2016, KCCI, and the issues we discussed back then about a producer on your staff. Thanks again, Andy
Andy, apologies but I’m lucky to remember what I had for breakfast much less what conversation we had seven years ago! Give me a hint and I’ll do my best to respond.
Probably best outside this forum. If you like you can share your email and I will send the emails we exchanged.
I hope you send your analysis to all the news organizations that might be tempted to repeat CNN's mistakes. Also all the major newspapers need to print this. I also think the "not playing by the rules" is important to think about with any Republican who is following Trump's playbook. Our governor, all our Senators, and so on are misleading the public every day. Fact-checking is good, but not quite enough. They need a powerful, immediate push-back that journalists haven't found a way to create yet. The "republicans" vs "democrats" old way of weighing the truth doesn't work. There is a missing angle. Journalists need a "neutral" party that can say "that was completely false," "that was partially true, and mostly false" etc. There needs to be some emotionally compelling storytelling that is based on facts, that works on TV, other than competing cable news channels. Maybe someone in a mini-box like a referee truth-defender (like they used to have someone doing sign language.) And in the age of AI, this could be the newest thing! My imagination is going now... maybe an AI Truth Defender with a cape and a logo! :)
Thanks, Nancy. I like a fact-checker in a box. “We interrupt this screed to bring you some facts!”
I didn't waste my time watching the CNN broadcast. Seriously, by now all journalists know who and what Donald Trump is. And the live broadcast, according to Dave, went as expected. So I'm glad I missed it. Some of the suggested rules of future engagement by news media make sense. But I'll skip those, too, and just watch the GOP Presidential debates next year.
Thanks for sharing your notes and lessons.
I could take a victory lap as the town hall was exactly as I expected, with one exception. I did think moderator Kaitlan Collins did an excellent job of TRYING to fact check this serial liar in real time. I think you are being a bit too hard on yourself; you couldn't be that naïve about Trump as you now say.
I won't take that victory lap because far from the propaganda I feared he would spew, the town hall was so incredibly horrific for Trump that it hopefully shocked and reminded those of us suburban types of the disaster that he is. If he was a fraction of the "stable genius" he claims, he'd have moderated and perhaps moved some moderates into his camp. He's a "wack job".
It also scares me to realize how little I have in common with that audience and the millions in the cult.
Was surprised at your earlier column that CNN maybe was on the right track. Thinking maybe I should watch. Ahhh…thought better and turned on Jeopardy Masters. Guessing was not alone in that decision. Not to categorize Trump folks but wondering if a show like Jeopardy — just the facts — isn’t their type of programming! Just saying.
I wish I had watched Jeopardy Masters. I’ve seen the first couple. Have the rest in DVR. Good point about one fact-based program vs the town hall.
"Moving forward, all journalists must realize that nothing has changed with Trump. He’s not like other candidates, so the media can’t treat him like other candidates."
Dave, I think this has it reversed. The media in 2015-2016 didn't treat Trump like other candidates. They covered him like a celebrity then and enabled him to build the cult-like following. CNN seemed to go down that road again this week, although with an interviewer who would allegedly "fact-check" him. I would suggest media should cover him like they cover everyone else in the race, but they probably can't put that toothpaste back in the tube.
That’s a good way of looking at it, Rich.
Your apology is refreshing. Something Trump (and most politicians) are incapable of these days. Good thing this train wreck occurred 17 months before the election, and few people will remember it or continue to be influenced by it. That leaves plenty of time for more lawsuits, investigations, and opportunities for Trump to do more stupid and terrible things that -- in a normal world -- would keep him from being re-elected.
Mark, I think this was one of those situations, for me at least, where enough time had gone by that the wounds had at least started to heal. Trump ripped the bandage off for all of us last night. A stark reminder that I hope wants any other media types away from repeating this disaster.
CNN promised to have a balanced audience. Watching last night's audience 'participation', I needed to double check recent N.H. presidential voting patterns, because one would have thought N.H. routinely votes R in presidential elections. Speaking of balance, other Presidential candidates will insist they have this free hour of publicity. CNN can choose to have a co-moderator in the future. CNN could do a fact check in the middle of the town hall; in professional sports, they routinely have replays. Also, CNN could permit a Democratic response to future town halls,. Dave is correct about Trump bringing out the worse in politics. What can of journalistic guard rails or buffer strips can be instituted to prevent everything ending up in the gutter.
Dave,
Agreed with you last week and agree this week. I admire that you stuck with it. We left after 30 minutes and watch the new Ted Lasso to cleanse and heal. It proved to be therapeutic. Your suggestions to the media are good ones. I hope they take heed. Your candor and humility are two reasons why you remain one of the most respected journalists in this state!
I’m not often accused of humility, Terri!
A couple of other good suggestions from a friend who emailed me privately She thought CNN could have done more visually to fact-check Trump. Such as a graphic listing all the court cases he lost trying to challenge the election. Another showing the large number of rioters convicted.
I would add to that list: Video of the riot when he says they were all good people. A list of all the women who have accused him of sexual abuse.
Visually, that might have at least slowed him down some and interrupted the flow of his misstatements. Would I recommend that for other candidates? No. But for him, I would.
Bottom line, let’s hope last night is a wake up call for all journalists. We can’t have a repeat.
Those are all excellent ideas!
Hi Dave: I missed the last few columns but you haven't lost either your journalistic vision or your common sense. Right on!
Thanks, Fred. I was dead wrong last week, as it turns out. Hope all is well.
Here’s an opinion on the topic…
https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/05/11/heres-how-reporters-should-cover-trumps-campaign/
Well, that is certainly a view one could take. It’s a little radical for my old-school standards. In my years as a political reporter, I had trained myself not to personally conclude that any candidate was good or evil. I had to train myself that it wasn’t my job. My job was to report politicians’ words and actions as accurately as possible so that viewers were informed enough to make those judgments. I felt that if I made those judgments myself, it would inevitably show up in my reporting. I didn’t want to do that. I tried to stay in my lane.
That’s all idealistic, I realize. And I quite agree that candidates like Trump stomp all over journalists who play by the rules. So, new rule!, as Bill Maher would say. Exactly what those rules are, we’re all still struggling to figure out.
100% agree with that article. When the president promotes sedition and becomes a traitor and continues to promote that behavior he cannot hold office. In that case, everyone's role changes. Journalists must report the truth not promote lies, liars, seditious conspirators or traitors. They must inform people about them. BTW, CNN did not present a town hall they hosted - perhaps, unwittingly, a rally. I hope they have learned their lesson.
Thank you! Yes, Yes, and Yes to all of your analysis!