CNN Hired People to Support Trump on air and stipulated that they NEVER bash him

[LaydeeBug]

Did they do the same for HRC?

Are these *our* airwaves, or Russia's?

[Exilednight]

1. First, CNN is not a broadcast station. They're a cable outlet.

That's a huge difference.

Second, you make this accusation, but where's your proof?

I'll agree that CNN had turned into the Trump channel, but that's where the viewers were.

[LaydeeBug]

2. "that's where the viewers were???" when the fuck did the news become supply side?

and splitting the hair over a cable outlet and broadcast station is some pretty weak tea.

Ask Zucker where the proof is. That's what they did.

[Exilednight]

3. The distinction is a very big deal.

Cable doesnt play by the same rules. Cable new is supply side.

Broadcast networks get the airwaves for free providing they supply one hour of informational content. Cable providers do not have the same agreement. They MUST turn a profit to stay in the cable game.

To turn a profit, they need viewers. Especially in a media landscape that shifts quickly and people look for the news they want to read, or agrees with them.

[LaydeeBug]

11. You're coming from THEIR end...not from OUR end and you know it.

and I am not talking about a left/right divide here either.

[Exilednight]

13. Those are just facts.

Cable news is nothing more than glamorizing unfortunate events.

They have to have ratings to stay profitable: that's a fact.

They're not bound by the same rules as broadcasters: that's a fact.

Do I wish they were governed by the same rules? Yes, but my wishes aren't so.

[LaydeeBug]

14. No...that's how they try and frame the narrative. Please proceed. Pretend.

nt

[Exilednight]

15. 2 questions for you.

1. Are cable networks bound by the same rules?

2. Do they need to be profitable to stay in business?

[LaydeeBug]

16. Thanks for your attempt to marginalize the issue by insisting *I* submit answers to your questions

But you are obfuscating the issue, and we both know it

[Exilednight]

18. Think what you want, but facts are facts.

Trump draws ratings. Like it, dislike it .... it doesn't matter because people tune in. You can ignore reality, but it's not going to change.

Trump is a reality television personality, and yes the networks treated him as such, but he also paid their bills because everyone wanted to hear what bombastic thing would come out of his mouth next.

Did they fees red meat to the masses? Yes.

Did the masses eat it up? Yes.

You accuse me of obfuscating, but you're ignoring the truth, and we both know it.

[pangaia]

27. I think you and Ladybug are both right.

The problem is, the lower intelligence 50% or so of Americans THINK cable news is news..


There is something immoral about what cable 'news' shows do.

[spooky3]

23. You don't think NBC, CBS, and ABC need/want to make profits to stay in business?

They have been obsessed with Nielsen ratings since...forever.

[Exilednight]

25. Broadcast networks would like their news hours to be profitable, but

they can make up the revenue during primetime television.

Broadcast networks are required to provide informational content every night. Cable "news" networks are under no such obligation.

[spooky3]

26. where is your link to support that?

And that seems to be a trivial distinction today. All networks are competitive for profits and survival. CNN shows lots of non-news content, such as crime shows, travel shows, etc.

Further, if the big networks merely "would like" their news broadcasts to be profitable, they wouldn't watch ratings so carefully. They absolutely watch ratings carefully and management fires people if they're dissatisfied with the ratings. They sell advertising based on these ratings -- specifically during the news hours and at other times.

[Exilednight]

29. No network actually covers th cost for producing one hour

of news through the advertising of that one hour. It's a very nice expensive venture.

Yes, they do want high ratings, but want they want more is to retain those viewers into the primetime hours. That's where the money is.

[Va Lefty]

5. News, especially cable news, has been profit driven for some time now

Last edited Thu Dec 8, 2016, 08:21 AM - Edit history (1)

the days when networks viewed the News Departments as public service divisions are gone. Not saying that is good just a reality.

[Kolesar]

8. Proof

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512648351#post7

[mcar]

12. Here is the proof

http://www.nationalmemo.com/hustlers-hucksters-hacks-who-helped-elect-trump/

For CNN, Trumpland’s been an entire off-the-shelf business model. Their president, Jeff Zucker, was the executive who green-lighted “The Apprentice” while head of NBC Entertainment. He’s a cocktail-party pal with Donald, and has been accused by Huffington Post and BuzzFeed founder Ken Lerer, who knows the media business inside and out, of turning the Trump campaign into the very backbone of their 2016 brand as “a strategy, a programming strategy.”

It’s certainly not, for the Cable News Network, a news story in any recognizable sense, which would imply some sort of responsibility to inform. How could CNN possibly do that after hiring Corey Lewandowski to comment upon a man, Donald Trump, whose emoluments he still received, and who was under a binding legal agreement never to inform the public of anything disparaging about him?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512647946

[Cha]

30. Thank you, mcar!

[no_hypocrisy]

4. "Network" must be seen as a documentary . . . . .

&t=29s

[LeftInTX]

6. Ben Mankiewicz noted the realities

Something considered idiocracy in 1976 is now reality.

[oasis]

7. Corey Lewandowsky was the head Trump cheerleader at CNN.

Cranking out propaganda while getting paid at both ends.

[FBaggins]

9. They didn't just "do the same for Hillary"

They did that for her. The Clinton campaign wanted Trump to get the nomination and pushed the networks to take him seriously.

[LaydeeBug]

10. Nice try. No dice.

You don't get to pretend that the Clinton's controlled CNN when Russia was.

[bettyellen]

17. Baloney. They had a list of three GOP candidates that they hoped wouldn't get eliminated early.

For strategic reasons, which basically every campaign does. And basically most people thought Trump would be he losingest of all of them. No one foresaw the bulk for the media ignoring all his crazy lies.

It was a list of three candidates, not propping up trump. So sick of this RW bullshit getting play.

[synergie]

22. One must truly twist reality and oneself into quite the pretzel to come with prime nonsense

like that. You actually believe such convoluted ridiculousness?

[m-lekktor]

31. exactly. it was in the leaked emails.

They figured he would be easy to beat.

[AgadorSparticus]

19. The propaganda is getting over the top. Why is anyone watching this nonsense? Turn that shit off!!

[LaydeeBug]

20. We need to let their advertisers know that we vote each day with our dollars. nt

[AgadorSparticus]

21. Yessss!!!! Let them know and turn it off until they act responsibly.

[jalan48]

24. We don't have much room to complain. Donna Brazile.

[LaydeeBug]

32. Donna Brazille was fired...was Lewandowski? False equivalence much? nt

[jalan48]

33. So she leaks a debate question to Hillary, gets fired by CNN and remains the Chair of our Party.

I'm sure you can understand what voters might think about that, especially undecideds. We lost any high ground we had, her actions just fed the , "Hillary as the corrupt, insider, politician". Big, fucking mistake.

[LaydeeBug]

34. Holy fuck, now you've FURTHERED the false equivalence *AND* extended it to Hillary.

Wow.

Like holy fucking WOW

[LaydeeBug]

36. You can't.

because you aren't screaming about the media turning into a de fact arm of the KGB.

And they won't talk about it.

They will tell YOU what to talk about.

[pansypoo53219]

28. CNNFux gnewz lite. diet fux.

[mtnsnake]

37. I don't doubt it. Today's CNN sucks, but it would be nice if you provided a link in your OP

that shows that CNN "stipulated that they never bash him."

[LaydeeBug]

38. It would be nice if the Courts Orders were followed too

but we are where we are.

PS. Rachel Maddow reported on this. I saw it.