Tag: don lemon
Why Journalists Must Disclose Conflicts Of Interest -- Before They're Exposed

Why Journalists Must Disclose Conflicts Of Interest -- Before They're Exposed

News Literacy Week 2022, an annual awareness event started by the News Literacy Project, a nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to making everyone “smart, active consumers of news and information and equal and engaged participants in a democracy” has closed out. From January 24 to 28, classes, webinars, and Twitter chats taught students and adults how to root out misinformation when consuming news media.
There’s no downplaying the importance of understanding what is accurate in the media. These days, news literacy is a survival tactic. One study estimated that at least 800 people died because they embraced a COVID falsehood — and that inquiry was conducted in the earliest months of the pandemic. About 67 percent of the unvaccinated believe at least one COVID-19 myth, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
It’s not that accurate information isn’t available; people are rejecting reports of vaccine efficacy and safety because they distrust the news media. A third of Americans polled by Gallup said they have no trust at all in mass media; another 27 percent don’t have much at all.
Getting people to believe information presented to them depends more on trust than it does on the actual data being shared. That is, improving trust isn’t an issue of improving reporting. It’s an issue of improving relationships with one’s audience.
And that’s the real news problem right now; some celebrity anchors at cable news outlets are doing little to strengthen their relationships with their audiences and a lot to strengthen their relationships with government officials.
The most obvious example is how CNN terminated Prime Time anchor Chris Cuomo last month for his failure to disclose the entirety of his role in advising his brother, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, on the sexual harassment accusation that unfolded in Albany, a scandal that eventually led to Andrew Cuomo’s resignation.
But there are others. Just this month, the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol revealed that another anchor on another cable news network, Laura Ingraham of Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle, texted then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows last January, advising Meadows how Trump should react to reports of possible armed protests at state capitols around the country. This revelation followed the story that Sean Hannity, host of the eponymous news hour at Fox News, also texted Meadows with advice last year.
And while he didn't advise a government official, CNN anchor Don Lemon revealed information not available to the public when he texted embattled Empire actor Jussie Smollett to tip him off about the Chicago Police Department’s wavering faith in his story about an assault. That’s from Smollett’s own sworn testimony.
When English philosopher Edmund Burke joked about the press being the Fourth Estate — in addition to the First, Second and Third (the clergy, nobility and commoners, respectively) — his point was that, despite their influence on each other, these “estates” — bastions of power — are supposed to be separate.
The Fourth Estate will always be an essential counterweight to government. But, since Donald Trump was elected in 2016, we’ve been so focused on stopping an executive branch from pressing the press to support an administration's agenda — either by belittling journalists or threatening to arrest them for doing their jobs — that we’ve ignored the ways that it affects and influences other Estates, and not necessarily through its reporting.
That is, we have news personalities-cum-reporters who are influencing government policy — and not telling us about it until it’s too late.
The United States has fostered an incredible closeness between the Second Estate — which in 2021 and 2022 would be political leaders — and the Fourth Estate. About a year ago, an Axios reporter had to be reassigned because she was dating one of President Biden’s press secretaries. Last year, James Bennet, the former editorial page editor of the New York Times and brother of Colorado Senator and 2020 Presidential candidate Michael Bennet, had to recuse himself publicly from the Gray Lady’s endorsement process. In 2013, the Washington Post reported at least eight marriages between Obama officials and established journalists.
To be clear, there aren’t any accusations that anyone just mentioned engaged in anything other than ethical behavior. But I, for one, don’t believe that James and Michael Bennet didn’t discuss Michael’s campaign. I don’t think the Axios reporter and her West Wing-employed boyfriend — or any journalists and their federally employed spouses, for that matter — didn’t share facts that the public will never know. Such is the nature of family and intimacy.
And as long as those conversations don’t affect the coverage of any news events, there’s nothing specifically, technically wrong with them. But that doesn’t mean that they aren’t damaging.
As these stories show, when we don’t know about these advisor roles, at least not until someone other than the journalist in question exposes them, it causes a further erosion of trust in news media.
What’s foolish about the Cuomo, Ingraham, Hannity, and Lemon improprieties is that they don't necessarily need to be the problem they’ve become. Cuomo’s show contained opinion content like 46 percent of CNN’s programming. An active debate rages on as to whether Fox News is all opinion and whether or not it can rightly even be called opinion journalism since its shows are so studded with inaccuracies and lies.
What that means is that Cuomo, Ingraham, Hannity, and Lemon are allowed to take a stand as opinion journalists; Cuomo and Lemon never really worked under a mandate of objectivity and Ingraham and Hannity likely wouldn’t honor it if they did. Indeed, a certain subjectivity — and explaining how it developed for the journalist — is part of an opinion journalist’s craft. To me, little of these consulting roles would be problematic if any of these anchors had just disclosed them and the ways they advised the people they cover.
But they didn’t. Instead, the advice they dispensed to government employees and celebrities was disclosed by a third party and news of it contributes to the public’s distrust in the media. While personal PR advisory connections between journalists and politicians haven’t been pinpointed as a source of distrust, they may have an effect. Almost two-thirds of respondents in a Pew Research poll said they attributed what they deemed unfair coverage to a political agenda on the part of the news organization. No one has rigorously examined the ways in which individual journalists can swing institutional opinion so it may be part of the reason why consumers are suspicious of news.
Cleaning up ex post facto is both a violation of journalistic ethics and ineffective. Apologies and corrections after the fact don't always improve media trust. In other credibility contests, like courtroom battles, statements against one’s interests enhance a person’s believability. But that’s not necessarily true of news; a 2015 study found that corrections don’t automatically enhance a news outlet’s credibility.
It’s a new adage for the 21st century: It’s not the consulting; it’s the cover-up. Journalists need to disclose their connections to government officials — up front — to help maintain trust in news media. Lives depend on it.

Chandra Bozelko did time in a maximum-security facility in Connecticut. While inside she became the first incarcerated person with a regular byline in a publication outside of the facility. Her “Prison Diaries" column ran in The New Haven Independent, and she later established a blog under the same name that earned several professional awards. Her columns now appear regularly in The National Memo.

There Is No Getting Used To Presidential Racism

There Is No Getting Used To Presidential Racism

About an hour into Tuesday night’s Democratic debate, Yamiche Alcindor, who covers the White House for PBS Newshour, tweeted this:

“I’ve been on the road for most of the last week. And it’s so important to highlight just how much people feel the president’s attacks put them personally in danger. Most black and brown people I’ve interviewed tell me this isn’t just about politics but (their) ability to survive.”

If you’re black or brown in America, you don’t need an explanation of what this means.

If you’re white, you shouldn’t need one either, but we all know that’s not how this plays out in too many homes in America.

The timing of Alcindor’s tweet was poignant, as the issue of race had not even been raised yet on the debate stage — by the journalists or the candidates. Not surprising. There is a faction of the Democratic Party that thinks we should ignore the president’s racism, if Trump is to be defeated in 2020. His racism “is a distraction,” the argument goes.

Not coincidentally, the ones making this argument are almost never the people targeted by the president’s racism. If denial were a color, it’d be this shade of white Democrats.

If you’re a person of color in this country, you can’t afford the luxury of indifference when the president of the United States is encouraging racists to be more open, shall we say, with their hatred of you. Just as certainly, those of us who are white can’t stand idly by either, if we believe the black community is our community, too. Think: America.

Recently, Trump told four women of color in Congress to “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.” Three of the four women were born in the United States, and all of them are citizens of this country.

Suddenly, finally, more of the powerful and influential — even in newsrooms — were willing to drop the euphemistic “racially tinged” to describe the presidentially unhinged.

This was racism, period, by the president of the United States.

As Washington Post executive editor Marty Baron put it:

“The Post traditionally has been cautious in the terminology it uses to characterize individuals’ statements, because a news organization’s job is to inform its readers as dispassionately as possible. Decisions about the terminology we use are made only after a thorough discussion among senior editors. We had that discussion today about President Trump’s use of a longstanding slur against African Americans and other minorities. The ‘go back’ trope is deeply rooted in the history of racism in the United States. Therefore, we have concluded that ‘racist’ is the proper term to apply to the language he used Sunday.”

A few days later, Trump went after another black member of Congress: Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), who represents part of Baltimore and has been a tireless critic of the president.

Cumming’s district “is a disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess,” he tweeted. “If he spent more time in Baltimore, maybe he could help clean up this very dangerous & filthy place.”

Oh, Republicans. Wouldn’t your patron saint, Ronald Reagan, be so proud?

Lately, I’ve been thinking about you white women who support Donald Trump and men like him. We are the same, you and I. Regardless of our politics, economic status or religious affiliation, we have been on the receiving end of misogyny and sexism all of our lives. We don’t know what it’s like to be black, but we surely know what it means to be judged and punished simply for being women, by men who feel entitled to control our bodies and our lives.

Why would we ever be on their side?

Jamil Smith, a black journalist who writes for Rolling Stone, weighed in this week on the daily toll of this president. The headline of his essay: “Trump’s Racism Is a National Emergency.”

“There is no getting used to this,” Jamil writes, “when you are in the crosshairs of this policy, when people who look like you sit patronized by a president who tells them all the time about how he got a few more of us some jobs and a few more of us out of jail, then acts as though we should be satisfied with that. ‘What do we have to lose?’ he asks, while we sit in this systematically racist America. ‘Why do we hate America?’ he wonders aloud, as we criticize his administration for working consciously to exacerbate inequities in everything from health care to education to housing. ‘Why don’t we want safety and security?’ Trump proclaims, as we see his government treat migrants (the ones who survive) like literal vermin while comparing our communities to ‘infestations.'”

On Tuesday night, three CNN journalists questioned the Democratic candidates. Two of them were white; one was black.

Donald Trump attacked only one of them, calling him “the dumbest man on television.” You know which one.

There is no getting used to this. Not if we still believe in America.

IMAGE: Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD).

#EndorseThis: Don Lemon Pins Lewandowski On Trump’s African American ‘Outreach’

#EndorseThis: Don Lemon Pins Lewandowski On Trump’s African American ‘Outreach’

Donald Trump thinks African American communities are in the worse shape they’ve ever been in, “ever, ever, ever.” Corey Lewandowski, his erstwhile campaign manager who, it was revealed last night, was paid $20,000 in August for “strategy consulting” rather than as part of a severance package, agrees.

Luckily, CNN anchor Don Lemon and Atlantic contributor Peter Beirnart remember that slavery existed not long ago, and even more recently, that Trump and his father were investigated by the Nixon Justice Department for discriminating against black potential tenants.

“Ever, ever, ever”? No. As Lemon pointed out last night, that’s not appeal to black voters — that’s talking at black voters, a thinly-veiled attempt to convince otherwise decent people that they’re not really voting for an outright racist.

WATCH: Corey Lewandowski Brings Back Trump’s Birther Conspiracy Theory

WATCH: Corey Lewandowski Brings Back Trump’s Birther Conspiracy Theory

Former Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski reignited the birther conspiracy theory last night — in his new job as a full-time political commentator on CNN.

While trying to defend his former boss from President Obama’s strong criticism earlier the same day, Lewandowski suggested Obama was hiding his birth place because he never released his Harvard transcripts, as Trump had once demanded of him.

When Angela Rye reminded him that Trump began attacking the president the president long before he became a presidential hopeful, most notoriously as a leader of the birther movement, Lewadownski tried turning the tables once again, digging up a years-old conspiracy.

“Did he ever release his transcripts from Harvard?” Lewandowski asked.

“You raised the issue. Did he, did he ever release his transcripts or his admission to Harvard University. You raised the issue, so just yes or no? The answer is no.”

Of course, any Trump surrogate should avoid talk of transcripts. Trump has refused to release his tax returns, breaking a traditional practice by presidential candidates since Watergate.

Rye had just two words to respond to Lewandowski: “Tax returns.”

But Lewandowski went on like a broken record. “Have those ever been released, and the question was did he get in as a U.S. citizen or was he brought into Harvard University as a citizen who wasn’t from this country?” he once again asked, as other members of the panels cringed, calling his accusations “blatantly disrespectful.”

“You think he’s Kenyan. You think he’s not from here!” Bakari Sellers responded.

Photo and video: CNN

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World