Shakeup at CNN?
Chris Licht wanted to make CNN a bit more “objective.” He even gave Trump a platform there – which may be his downfall. At any rate, he’s reportedly in some difficulty.
I simply don’t watch any TV news anymore. But a great many still people do, although I doubt most of them are young. And between CNN and Fox, there’s a lot of network trouble to go around.
The mistake Licht made was not cleaning house of everyone, pretty much, and hiring all new staff. You can’t ride the line between keeping some liberals and some conservatives on board because the divide between the two sides is now irreconcilable.
Either that, or leave it the way it was.
Yep Callahan, you fire the troublemakers. Of course Trump should have done the same.
A long time ago I worked for a High Tech company in Boulder Cty (it was a founded by former IBM’ers). They filed for Bankruptcy and fired a lot of “troublemakers”, all of the group of Women whom were causing “trouble” with Management. Got away with it because of the BK.
I don’t watch tv news either. I have to change the channel while watching business channels when they do their news briefs. The news is so slanted I’ll end up yelling at the tv if I don’t.
I also refuse to watch political speeches or political debates. Just a waste of time. Mostly BS. Whatever tiny bit of worthwhile content can be learned in a few seconds of reading.
Many years ago I suggested to David Horowitz that some news organization could capture a large market share by being transparently balanced. For example, put out a paper literally split down the middle with a liberal side and a conservative side. Two stories for each event/issue/etc. Or perhaps explicitly identify the political leanings of all reporters and editors and have conservative editors for liberal reporters and vice versa. Or for tv news have separate production groups and explicitly identify how each side was trying to spin a story. Horowitz said it would never work. I’m more convinced now that it would.
The biggest lie of my lifetime is the one that news organizations have tried to peddle about being fair and balanced while actively collaborating and conspiring with the Left. I think there is a market for transparency. Starting with the truth would be a good first step.
News organizations like CNN fumbled their humble. They won’t ever recover until they start owning their lies of the past and explain how they are going to regain trust and credibility.
Someone remarked that the main thing TV news channels are selling is *comfort*…the feeling that your own views are correct and a lot of good people agree with them.
I think Musk is going to go after what is left of the TV broadcasting industry in a big way…not by acquiring stations or networks, but rather via expansion of his current tech platform.
Instances like the flap over “What is a Woman” are exposing the remaining wokesters so he can get rid of them.
Re: “What is a Woman”
You can watch it for free for the next 24 hours or so. It’s quite good so far.
https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1664424891372941312
huxley,
I gave it a whirl and I agree: quite good. There’s a right-leaning bias baked in, so I really can’t recommend it to some people, butcha know what? — they won’t care to give it a hearing / viewing anyway.
Blanket recommendation: watch things like this at speed = 1.25×. (I’ve even tried 1.50× for some videos, but that doesn’t work for speakers who already talk a little quickly. On another hand, 1.50× works wonderfully for people like Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA).)
EDIT: Oh. It looks like neo offered a similar recommendation on another blog post she published today.
David Foster on June 3, 2023 at 12:28 pm
I agree about Musk and Twitter, but actually we really need at least 3 to 12 such objective and relatively neutral media sources. Competition is supposed to help keep them ALL honest. Some blogs and substacks may help fill this void, but they usually also have a (recognized) political bias or orientation.
And from a business revenue standpoint, I suspect Musk would be happy to “broadcast” them all.
TDS is also distorting a lot of people’s outlook and info source selection [that is both pro and con on Trump].
Whatever Licht is doing, I would bet it’s as instructed. I’ve heard that John Malone is large and in-charge at CNN now, and he’s a pretty staunch conservative that has stated that he is returning it to its news roots. I don’t imagine he wants to lose the remaining tiny fraction of viewership, so perhaps he’s conducting it in phases. But the sea change is apparently due to his vision.
I’ve also heard the thought expressed that re-enabling dissenting views about election results is simply hedging bets in the event that a Republican wins, in which case it could only be due to fraud.
Making news “objective”? What a novel idea. Has never before been done by TV or print MSM!
Trouble is, I cut off all cable/satelliteTV inputs some years ago, just watch DVDs rarely. refer to read, right now a 2-vol. bio of ex-Pope Benedict XV by Seewald, now Joseph Ratzinger again. A most brilliant man. Of course, it helps to be of Roman Catholic faith despite the sitting Pope Francis, the first from Latin America and its “Liberation theology”. Fortunately Popes are deemed infallible only on matters of faith and morals.
You need viewers to sell to advertisers. Whether CNN can provide same long enough to stabilize on another course is kind of up in the air.
There is a market for weird lefty stuff and if CNN stops providing it, making it up by getting some folks from Fox or Epoch or whichever isn’t going to fill the void.
tim alberta citing tater stelter, I think lichts chain saw has cut through as much deadwood, now it’s the leavy guys turn,
MJR, I bet Ben Shapiro at 1.5x speed would be like Alvin and the Chipmunks.
I stopped watching news (I used to weatch Fox because at least they had conservative voices) last November and I have never looked back.