Dave -- as the former employee of a Sinclair owned TV station, I could not agree more with these comments. One question: Doesn't the Sinclair move in Sioux City violate the terms of their license with the FCC? I believe that license states they need to cover the news in the community where they hold the license.
Amy, do you mean station licenses in general or that one in particular? If you mean in general, there are lots of radio and TV stations that don’t provide local news. In my view, they should. I suppose there are other ways a licensee can demonstrate to the FCC that they’re serving the local community, such as PSA’s, children’s programming, etc.
I cringe when I hear journalists on my favorite (your previous) TV station report on Trump like he is just a normal responsible political figure talking to citizens. You are right, he cannot be ignored. But he does not have to be featured as uplifting and honest. I think his baggage should always be mentioned and acknowledged.
Has anyone ever watched a presidential debate or a televised interview with Trump? The odds that a newsman - any newsman - can hold this congenital liar to the truth in a “town hall” are smaller than me winning the lottery. Walter Cronkite couldn’t do it. He will talk right over her.
We are giving a mob boss an hour of free propaganda. Oh, CNN will get ratings and perhaps some far-right loonies will think more kindly toward it but at what expense to the nation? Any other legitimate Republican candidate can and should have such a stage and opportunity but we’ve never had a mob boss in such a prominent position and therefore we need special rules.
Rod, I am conflicted on this. The old school journalist in me always wants the news outlet to take the high road and at least TRY to offer complete, balanced coverage. But the cynic in me understands that part of Trump’s strategy is to attack journalists who try to be fair to him, and certainly those who challenge his lies. He drags us down in the mud with him. He drags EVERYONE into the mud with him. Therefore, special rules apply.
I would much rather have CNN cover him in a format where they can challenge him immediately rather than just covering his campaign rallies where he blathers on and reporters are stuck in the back of the room with no opportunity to ask questions. Or just quote from his social media posts.
I could be flat out wrong. We’ll have to see how it goes. If the town hall turns into a dumpster fire, CNN can at least say that they tried.
I think we have to take the past as a lesson and realize that Trump is not getting better, he is getting worse. He is vengeful, blaming everyone now & making up lies at warp speed. God help our nation if he ends up president again. That must be reported. Those are facts. What journalists need to cover well are his trials & everything to do with them, his arrogant disrespectful discourse on anything legitimate & point out the lies & call them what they are. That is where they failed last time. Those are the truths & the lies have been quantified. Report that. (BTW, I do have a journalism background.)
If only a sullied-in-this-way person could be viewed by society at large as bearing a badge of honor. That is, THOSE are the persons who we ought to be celebrating, and not just in journalistic circles.
I agree with Dave about loss of local media and to leaning in support of CNN--up to a point. Dave notes the complications on whether to cancel. However, has CNN boxed itself into a corner that will only benefit Jan. 6 deniers, extreme MAGA types and their followers?. If history repeats, Trump will ignore, lie, put Collins on defensive, and otherwise convince or reinforce followers that he stands for freedom, that he is the victim, and that supporters should fight back. I am unsure of what unused journalist tools are at the disposition of Kaitlyn Collins and CNN to overcome Trump lies. I do not know of any journalistic tools available to prevent Trump from using this CNN event as a megaphone to proclaim Jan. 6 was patriotic, disparaging American democratic values, spouting Russian talking points, etc.; if Collins calls out assertions as untrue (e.g. convictions of Jan. 6 defendants, NATO support of Ukraine), Trump will say she is wrong and the media is controlled by certain elites. At best, it becomes a stalemate, as seen by some or even many viewers and readers of the follow up media accounts. At worse, it becomes a victory for Trump, because all media coverage for Trump is good for Trump-regardless if there are panelists and commentators who refute every lie of Trump. If for some reason, Collins achieves Murrow level skills, and Trump’s Achilles Heel is exposed, others will take his place. If nothing else, other R candidates will insist CNN provides equal coverage. CNN has yet to indicate how it will keep from being painted into a corner. Amanda Carpenter, who worked for Cruz, wrote of Trump’s playbook in 2016. I hope I am wrong in believing this CNN event may become another page in his playbook.
While I lament the degradation of local news coverage (both broadcast and print) manifest by the eruption of these consolidators, balance requires that we examine why 186 (that's a lot!) station-owners agreed to sell, owners that largely lived and worked locally. Did they not abandon their communities to the vagaries of distant ownership? Should we not blame them for the ultimate result? Of course we should, or at least could.
But consider their alternative--the major reason for selling in the vast majority of cases was surely economic--rising costs and declining local viewership and ad revenue heralding ultimate bankruptcy. To their credit they rescued some capital that could still be of use in the community, an option not available to the corner hardware store or grocery.
Sinclair at least extended the life of local news a few years, but even they are up against inflation and evolving choices made by consumers and advertisers. There are proposed solutions but they, too, are problematic.
Bob, the major reason for selling was of course economic. But that's because the FCC changed the rules (under Reagan) for the number of stations and other major media platforms a single entity can own/control on a per-market basis as well as nationally. This opened the door to mega glomerates like Sinclair to take virtually total control of information sources that reach the general population. Simultaneously the Fairness Doctrine was scrapped meaning that Sinclair, Clear Channel and their like no longer are required to present any opposing viewpoints to serve the public interest that previously had been required in order to hold the right to use publicly-owned airwaves. Bring back the Fairness Doctrine and enforce it. Then the concentration of ownership will be much less of a factor in undermining what's left of our democratic republic. Otherwise, our political future will become even more dismal.
Bob, I worked in local television for 40 years and we never had a local owner. Meredith, located in DSM, never owned a station here. So local ownership hasn’t been common for a long time. The station I worked at was sold several times, to increasingly larger groups, but never more than about 35 stations, which is difficult enough to manage. I can’t imagine running more than 100 stations.
The companies I worked for wanted to earn a profit, of course, but they also believed in doing it the right way. They invested in local news. They insisted local stations serve the community. They built a high wall between news and sales. I was lucky to work for such companies.
But the large conglomerates are growing their portfolios. It’s a big problem. To me, station ownership is everything. Local news SHOULD be a money-maker, especially during election years. I can’t imagine why Sinclair would shut down local news except they somehow had debased the product so much that it wasn’t making money at those stations.
I understand your confliction. I am a 1972 Iowa State journalism graduate and I've wondered how my old professors - Ed Blinn and Bill Kunerth for two - would handle this. I know how they'd cover anyone but Trump. I once heard said that American institutions were not built to handle Donald Trump because they were based on a basic decentness - you follow laws, respect traditions, admit wrongs, concede defeats, tell the truth and so forth. Founding Fathers tried to envision a future Trump but their infrastructure doesn't hold anymore than an Iowa electric fence designed to contain cattle won't stop a charging hippo.
He has a genius for appealing to the lowest common denominator and unfortunately a large swath of America loves his act (even if they realize he's slimy). There's a chance he'll botch the Town Hall but now he's being "handled" by very professional pols who are much wiser than his previous team. He's a danger to our nation and should be treated as such.
CNN can make any editorial decisions it wishes. But if the network devotes live coverage to Donald Trump, it should do so for all the other declared Republican presidential candidates regardless of their rankings in public opinion polls. By ignoring the lesser GOP hopefuls, CNN will continue the regrettable “horserace” tradition that too many media fall prey to. This flaw, as you write, elevates some candidates in the eyes of the public. It unfairly sets the agenda for presidential campaigns and coverage.
I m concerned about CNN. Inthe last 2 days I saw their story about rising temperatures in the oceans, and the consequences. They repeatedly said no one really knows why those temperatures are going up! The ocean is absorbing most of the increased heat held in by greenhouse gases. CNN is abandoning science?
Hmmm. From the company that aided and abetted Steve King. Northwest Iowa for generations has viewed itself as an outcast from the rest of the state. That sense of isolation only will increase, further fueling the polarization that has turned Iowa away from its progressive roots.
Agree with you, Dave, and I've had this debate with numerous friends. He's a former president and the front-runner for the nomination. I don't see how a mainstream news organization can claim to be "fair" while ignoring a major party candidate.
No one knows what to do about the there's-no-such-thing-as-bad-publicity issue, but it's CNN's obligation to call out every false statement and hope for the best. I'm not yet ready to admit that I wasted my entire life checking facts and trying to bring the audience accurate information. The fact is, we do have an audience that cares about facts and reality, and we must continue to serve them.
Dave, I sympathize with the notion that the CNN town hall can be argued both ways. I just come down on the other side. I submit that CNN (and the other cable networks) did learn their lesson in 2016. The lesson is: Trump gets ratings! That's why they're offering him a "town hall." One could ask where is the town hall with Nikki Haley? Now maybe they offered her an opportunity and she declined; I don't know. Or maybe they're negotiating about one. But there's a rea$on Trump is the first program, aside from his having the highest poll ratings.
I agree with your point that CNN as a news organization can't not cover Trump. But making up an event for him is not covering him. They SHOULD cover him like they're covering the other announced candidates, which amounts to not that much airtime. And for now, I think we're better off as a people with not having every utterance of presidential hopefuls on the news every night.
I wish I had a stronger argument for my position, but I don’t! Personally, I’m right with you. Ethically, I’m with Fred. I just don’t want to see CNN head down the same road as Fox, which, for instance, mostly ignored the Proud Boys verdict this week. It’s completely irresponsible.
Come Thursday morning, you probably will be justified in sending me an “I told you so!” And I’ll probably deserve it.
Remember, Trump never quit campaigning. He's had rallies since the last elections. He doesn't know what else to do with his time. Plus, it is how he makes his money. He will do many more events than others, they don't all need to be covered. It makes him like more than he is.
Nope, Dave. There won't be any "told you so" coming from me. We have honest opinions. To me it doesn't matter how good or awful the event is; I just think CNN shouldn't stage it for him.
We’ve never needed local news more. Sinclair already had a combo in the market with Fox and CBS but they’re too incompetent to make money. Or too short-sighted to invest in it. Viewers can get network shows anywhere. The main reason to watch local is....LOCAL. It’s even in the name.
The FCC is worthless. Fox and CBS should require stations to produce news as part of their affiliation agreements. It’s good for the community and the networks.
Agree. Remember how CBS national ratings crashed back when Fox stole all those affiliates as part of their NFL deal? The CBS Evening News never recovered from being on weak stations in Atlanta, Detroit, etc. It totally makes sense that the networks require local news.
Perhaps CNN should have Daniel Dale, their resident fact-checker, live in the studio, adding on-screen graphics that call out his lies (with factual substantiation) as they occur. It would be easy to be prepared in advance with dozens of clarifications for the lies we know will be coming.
Dave -- as the former employee of a Sinclair owned TV station, I could not agree more with these comments. One question: Doesn't the Sinclair move in Sioux City violate the terms of their license with the FCC? I believe that license states they need to cover the news in the community where they hold the license.
Amy, do you mean station licenses in general or that one in particular? If you mean in general, there are lots of radio and TV stations that don’t provide local news. In my view, they should. I suppose there are other ways a licensee can demonstrate to the FCC that they’re serving the local community, such as PSA’s, children’s programming, etc.
I cringe when I hear journalists on my favorite (your previous) TV station report on Trump like he is just a normal responsible political figure talking to citizens. You are right, he cannot be ignored. But he does not have to be featured as uplifting and honest. I think his baggage should always be mentioned and acknowledged.
Has anyone ever watched a presidential debate or a televised interview with Trump? The odds that a newsman - any newsman - can hold this congenital liar to the truth in a “town hall” are smaller than me winning the lottery. Walter Cronkite couldn’t do it. He will talk right over her.
We are giving a mob boss an hour of free propaganda. Oh, CNN will get ratings and perhaps some far-right loonies will think more kindly toward it but at what expense to the nation? Any other legitimate Republican candidate can and should have such a stage and opportunity but we’ve never had a mob boss in such a prominent position and therefore we need special rules.
Rod, I am conflicted on this. The old school journalist in me always wants the news outlet to take the high road and at least TRY to offer complete, balanced coverage. But the cynic in me understands that part of Trump’s strategy is to attack journalists who try to be fair to him, and certainly those who challenge his lies. He drags us down in the mud with him. He drags EVERYONE into the mud with him. Therefore, special rules apply.
I would much rather have CNN cover him in a format where they can challenge him immediately rather than just covering his campaign rallies where he blathers on and reporters are stuck in the back of the room with no opportunity to ask questions. Or just quote from his social media posts.
I could be flat out wrong. We’ll have to see how it goes. If the town hall turns into a dumpster fire, CNN can at least say that they tried.
I think we have to take the past as a lesson and realize that Trump is not getting better, he is getting worse. He is vengeful, blaming everyone now & making up lies at warp speed. God help our nation if he ends up president again. That must be reported. Those are facts. What journalists need to cover well are his trials & everything to do with them, his arrogant disrespectful discourse on anything legitimate & point out the lies & call them what they are. That is where they failed last time. Those are the truths & the lies have been quantified. Report that. (BTW, I do have a journalism background.)
Not sure on this one, Dave. Have yet to see a reporter who was up to the challenge of holding him to account. We'll see.
To be honest, Dean, I’m not sure either! We should TRY to do the right thing. Trump manages to sully everyone who tries.
If only a sullied-in-this-way person could be viewed by society at large as bearing a badge of honor. That is, THOSE are the persons who we ought to be celebrating, and not just in journalistic circles.
AGREED!!!
I agree with Dave about loss of local media and to leaning in support of CNN--up to a point. Dave notes the complications on whether to cancel. However, has CNN boxed itself into a corner that will only benefit Jan. 6 deniers, extreme MAGA types and their followers?. If history repeats, Trump will ignore, lie, put Collins on defensive, and otherwise convince or reinforce followers that he stands for freedom, that he is the victim, and that supporters should fight back. I am unsure of what unused journalist tools are at the disposition of Kaitlyn Collins and CNN to overcome Trump lies. I do not know of any journalistic tools available to prevent Trump from using this CNN event as a megaphone to proclaim Jan. 6 was patriotic, disparaging American democratic values, spouting Russian talking points, etc.; if Collins calls out assertions as untrue (e.g. convictions of Jan. 6 defendants, NATO support of Ukraine), Trump will say she is wrong and the media is controlled by certain elites. At best, it becomes a stalemate, as seen by some or even many viewers and readers of the follow up media accounts. At worse, it becomes a victory for Trump, because all media coverage for Trump is good for Trump-regardless if there are panelists and commentators who refute every lie of Trump. If for some reason, Collins achieves Murrow level skills, and Trump’s Achilles Heel is exposed, others will take his place. If nothing else, other R candidates will insist CNN provides equal coverage. CNN has yet to indicate how it will keep from being painted into a corner. Amanda Carpenter, who worked for Cruz, wrote of Trump’s playbook in 2016. I hope I am wrong in believing this CNN event may become another page in his playbook.
While I lament the degradation of local news coverage (both broadcast and print) manifest by the eruption of these consolidators, balance requires that we examine why 186 (that's a lot!) station-owners agreed to sell, owners that largely lived and worked locally. Did they not abandon their communities to the vagaries of distant ownership? Should we not blame them for the ultimate result? Of course we should, or at least could.
But consider their alternative--the major reason for selling in the vast majority of cases was surely economic--rising costs and declining local viewership and ad revenue heralding ultimate bankruptcy. To their credit they rescued some capital that could still be of use in the community, an option not available to the corner hardware store or grocery.
Sinclair at least extended the life of local news a few years, but even they are up against inflation and evolving choices made by consumers and advertisers. There are proposed solutions but they, too, are problematic.
Bob, the major reason for selling was of course economic. But that's because the FCC changed the rules (under Reagan) for the number of stations and other major media platforms a single entity can own/control on a per-market basis as well as nationally. This opened the door to mega glomerates like Sinclair to take virtually total control of information sources that reach the general population. Simultaneously the Fairness Doctrine was scrapped meaning that Sinclair, Clear Channel and their like no longer are required to present any opposing viewpoints to serve the public interest that previously had been required in order to hold the right to use publicly-owned airwaves. Bring back the Fairness Doctrine and enforce it. Then the concentration of ownership will be much less of a factor in undermining what's left of our democratic republic. Otherwise, our political future will become even more dismal.
Bob, I worked in local television for 40 years and we never had a local owner. Meredith, located in DSM, never owned a station here. So local ownership hasn’t been common for a long time. The station I worked at was sold several times, to increasingly larger groups, but never more than about 35 stations, which is difficult enough to manage. I can’t imagine running more than 100 stations.
The companies I worked for wanted to earn a profit, of course, but they also believed in doing it the right way. They invested in local news. They insisted local stations serve the community. They built a high wall between news and sales. I was lucky to work for such companies.
But the large conglomerates are growing their portfolios. It’s a big problem. To me, station ownership is everything. Local news SHOULD be a money-maker, especially during election years. I can’t imagine why Sinclair would shut down local news except they somehow had debased the product so much that it wasn’t making money at those stations.
Agree 100%, local ownership aside, with the evolution, factors involved and outcome.
Keep up the good work!
I understand your confliction. I am a 1972 Iowa State journalism graduate and I've wondered how my old professors - Ed Blinn and Bill Kunerth for two - would handle this. I know how they'd cover anyone but Trump. I once heard said that American institutions were not built to handle Donald Trump because they were based on a basic decentness - you follow laws, respect traditions, admit wrongs, concede defeats, tell the truth and so forth. Founding Fathers tried to envision a future Trump but their infrastructure doesn't hold anymore than an Iowa electric fence designed to contain cattle won't stop a charging hippo.
He has a genius for appealing to the lowest common denominator and unfortunately a large swath of America loves his act (even if they realize he's slimy). There's a chance he'll botch the Town Hall but now he's being "handled" by very professional pols who are much wiser than his previous team. He's a danger to our nation and should be treated as such.
CNN can make any editorial decisions it wishes. But if the network devotes live coverage to Donald Trump, it should do so for all the other declared Republican presidential candidates regardless of their rankings in public opinion polls. By ignoring the lesser GOP hopefuls, CNN will continue the regrettable “horserace” tradition that too many media fall prey to. This flaw, as you write, elevates some candidates in the eyes of the public. It unfairly sets the agenda for presidential campaigns and coverage.
I am afraid continuing to give Trump a forum on CNN will embolden his followers and hurt our country more than he already has done.
I m concerned about CNN. Inthe last 2 days I saw their story about rising temperatures in the oceans, and the consequences. They repeatedly said no one really knows why those temperatures are going up! The ocean is absorbing most of the increased heat held in by greenhouse gases. CNN is abandoning science?
I hope not! I hope their pendulum is swinging back to the center and not too far right. I doubt they’ll go too far.
Hmmm. From the company that aided and abetted Steve King. Northwest Iowa for generations has viewed itself as an outcast from the rest of the state. That sense of isolation only will increase, further fueling the polarization that has turned Iowa away from its progressive roots.
Agree with you, Dave, and I've had this debate with numerous friends. He's a former president and the front-runner for the nomination. I don't see how a mainstream news organization can claim to be "fair" while ignoring a major party candidate.
No one knows what to do about the there's-no-such-thing-as-bad-publicity issue, but it's CNN's obligation to call out every false statement and hope for the best. I'm not yet ready to admit that I wasted my entire life checking facts and trying to bring the audience accurate information. The fact is, we do have an audience that cares about facts and reality, and we must continue to serve them.
Exactly, Fred. Well-said. Better than I did!
Dave -- Excellent column. Even-handed observations with experienced insight. That Sioux City piece is distressing.
Dave, I sympathize with the notion that the CNN town hall can be argued both ways. I just come down on the other side. I submit that CNN (and the other cable networks) did learn their lesson in 2016. The lesson is: Trump gets ratings! That's why they're offering him a "town hall." One could ask where is the town hall with Nikki Haley? Now maybe they offered her an opportunity and she declined; I don't know. Or maybe they're negotiating about one. But there's a rea$on Trump is the first program, aside from his having the highest poll ratings.
I agree with your point that CNN as a news organization can't not cover Trump. But making up an event for him is not covering him. They SHOULD cover him like they're covering the other announced candidates, which amounts to not that much airtime. And for now, I think we're better off as a people with not having every utterance of presidential hopefuls on the news every night.
I wish I had a stronger argument for my position, but I don’t! Personally, I’m right with you. Ethically, I’m with Fred. I just don’t want to see CNN head down the same road as Fox, which, for instance, mostly ignored the Proud Boys verdict this week. It’s completely irresponsible.
Come Thursday morning, you probably will be justified in sending me an “I told you so!” And I’ll probably deserve it.
I appreciate you suggesting this topic, Rich.
Remember, Trump never quit campaigning. He's had rallies since the last elections. He doesn't know what else to do with his time. Plus, it is how he makes his money. He will do many more events than others, they don't all need to be covered. It makes him like more than he is.
Nope, Dave. There won't be any "told you so" coming from me. We have honest opinions. To me it doesn't matter how good or awful the event is; I just think CNN shouldn't stage it for him.
We’ve never needed local news more. Sinclair already had a combo in the market with Fox and CBS but they’re too incompetent to make money. Or too short-sighted to invest in it. Viewers can get network shows anywhere. The main reason to watch local is....LOCAL. It’s even in the name.
The FCC is worthless. Fox and CBS should require stations to produce news as part of their affiliation agreements. It’s good for the community and the networks.
Agree. Remember how CBS national ratings crashed back when Fox stole all those affiliates as part of their NFL deal? The CBS Evening News never recovered from being on weak stations in Atlanta, Detroit, etc. It totally makes sense that the networks require local news.
Perhaps CNN should have Daniel Dale, their resident fact-checker, live in the studio, adding on-screen graphics that call out his lies (with factual substantiation) as they occur. It would be easy to be prepared in advance with dozens of clarifications for the lies we know will be coming.
How about instead of James Earl Jones booming out “This is CNN” they have him cued up to say “This is BS!” every time Trump lies.
Love that - & it would be true!!!