Was this reporter terribly wise?

http://www.politicususa.com/en/CNN-Chicago-Tea-Party Watch the video. I don't think she was unbiased, do you? Why not let the guy make his statement and then ask her questions?

Yes, I heard this clip on the radio. The media is always doing things like this.

The funny thing is that Hannity is guilty of this EVERY DAY on his show yet he'll probably rail away at this reporter from another network for doing it.

Not that it makes it right, of course. More and more these days I'm growling "STFU!" at the TV when a reporter asks a question and then cuts off the interviewee after three words so they can answer it themselves. Why bother?

Would somebody mind summing up the video?

Where were all these people for the last 16 years?

Hell, where were they when Clinton decided to jack up taxes - then retroactivate them?

Oh, that's right. Fox wasn't there to egg them on.

It's why I stopped watching all those shows, on CNN and Fox. They don't really interview people, they just spout editorials while the "interviewee" goes "hummina hummina butbutbut..."


Very. bad. journalism.

The CNN reporter is at a tea party in Chicago. She reads off a few signs and then tries to interview a man who's carrying his young kid. That man has a sign that says the kid is 4 (or whatever) and already in debt.

She interviews the man, and he starts talking about Lincoln and what he stood for. She cuts him off and asks what does that have to do with taxes. He continues talking about how Lincoln stood for liberty and such. She interjects something to the effect of did he know that the land of Lincoln (i.e. Illinois) receives X amount from the federal government. He continues on. She walks away from him. She then essentially throws it back to the studio, saying it's not family viewing and it's sponsored by the right-wing network of FOX.

IMO, she crossed a line. It's understandable, especially assuming that there was stuff these people were saying that managed to not get on the air. But that doesn't make it right.

I think she was overly antagonistic. But the guy was not answering her questions. I think that given the limited time, it would not be a surprise that she would press for an answer when he was going on this long windup.

I don't see reporters doing stuff like this very frequently at all.

Hannity's not a reporter and has no need for even a pretense of objectivity (or for that matter, civility).

I believe FOX was around in the Clinton era.

It sounds to me like it's less that she crossed a line than that her producer's an idiot because something like this should never be done live. Live interviews with crazy people don't go well and force you to appear either idiotic or biased.

She asked him why he was there, not his position on tax policy.

She was a jackass and he was an idiot.

Considering it was a rally against taxes, I think that point should have been understood.

I mean honestly, he goes on about liberty? Who the fuck is stealing your freedoms, the boogeyman?

This is why I can't take Republicans seriously. Everytime I give them a chance to provide a clear and rational alternative, they start screaming about how people hate God and wrap themselves in the American flag.

This has to be the worst offender, because what started out as a rational, albeit angry protest by Rick Santelli on CNBC turned into this laundry list of imagined governmental slights, without any serious consideration what the benefits of the Stimulus is (like in Michigan, where Joe the Plumber started crying that people hate God and the crowd ignored the fact that we need the damn money in this state).

Liberty. The man who suspended the writ of habeas corpus?

As is quite often the case, Jenee, protesters have reasons for being at a particular protest that are different than what is stated. How many people went to the immigration rallies, not necessarily because they were angry at the current government policy but because they were supporting a person they cared about? Or because, in some cases with both the anti-war and immigration rallies and I hope these were few and far between, that they wanted to miss school and had permission or incentive to do so?

I went to a pro-troops rally at the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom in support of people I knew. I wanted to support the troops. And I had a personal incentive to be there. If a reporter then cut me off and started asking me about supporting an unjust war, in his or her view, that would've crossed a line. And that wasn't his or her original question. The question is, why was I here?

Oh fuck the anti-war movement!

They're as bad, if not worse, as these assholes at the TEA parties. Bunch of fucking losers and deadbeats who were to stupid to do anything about their lot in life wanted to vent their frustrations at the government for actions they caused.

Taxation with representation assholes.

I call it the Phil Donahue method of interviewing.

So what makes your need so damn great that you can receive funding by dipping into my pockets for compensation? Hint: drawing breath doesn't entitle you to anything.

I make no apologies for my own survival.

If that bothers you, do something about it.

So basically you admit that you have no problem with stealing from others for your own benefit?

National news has stopped being about being our eyes and ears and the public watchdog, and has instead become a network of shamelessly biased promoters of their own ideologies. Whether it be about Conservatives or Liberals, our minds have been made for us. It's the source of a lot of disinformation, which of course just adds to the general malaise we all feel toward one another.

I could go on for a while about our national media.

J.

You're comfortable with the idea of taking the money of hardworking people when you are fully capable and in a position to earn it yourself?

How about just taking responsibility for your own fucking survival?

Depends on the who and the what, but generally, not if I need. There's a difference between want and need.

In any case, the stimulus bill is hardly theft (and more like printing money), which you could argue is theft by vitrue of a lessened dollar, but then that has the virtue of making American goods more appealing, thereby increasing the total wealth of the average individual.

Responsible to whom? To you?

Forgive me if I care little for the Omahan Pontiff's sensibilities.

As of March, we just experienced year-over-year deflation for the first time in forever. Anyone worrying about inflation right now is a crank. We should be vastly more worried about the Fed raising interest rates too quickly once the economy starts going again, thereby choking off the recovery.

Rationalize all you want, you fucking parasite. There is no excuse for collecting something you didn't earn.

See how much liberty you have when all your wealth is taxed, regulated, or inefficiencied away

I'm a little surprised by this from Roesgen. She's usually better than that (especially for CNN).


I used to work with her brother, and he's a fucking moron.

A gay moron.

Reporters have been doing that shit for a long time - Orson Welles made fun of it in his 1930s broadcast of The War of the Worlds, and even back in the 19th century newspaper reports could be like that during their own interviews, and print basically whatever the hell they wanted.

Shooter, I'm curious: How would you handle that sort of situation? Live shot, protest, the person you're interviewing is rambling and semi-hostile, as are all the protesters because of your station? I've never had to be in that situation, having never done "live" reporting, and having been print, where the person would know that pontificating wouldn't do him any good, and where I would know I could afford to let him rant for a while.