CNN shilling for the GOP

[Lithos]

Link to tweet

?s=21

[NanceGreggs]

1. At what point did CNN ...

... identify this group as "just-so-average, plain ol' women”?

[sandensea]

5. The GOPee thinks that because Poppy Bush got away with it in '90, they should use plants everywhere

Nayirah al-Sabah, who unbeknownst to Congress was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador, hamming it up for the cameras in 1990.

Her "babies ripped from incubators" tale (never verified, and widely believed to be fabricated) helped secure U.S. voter support for the 1991 invasion - and indirectly, for the 2003 invasion.

Arguably the GOP's favorite go-to deception ever since.

[NanceGreggs]

8. That doesn't change my question.

When did CNN present this group as though they were randomly chosen off the street?

There was no deception here by CNN.

[sandensea]

9. That IS a good question!

Big Media, contrary to GOPee whining about it being a "librul media," usually take the right-wing position on most big issues almost as a default.

There are exceptions like MSNBC (up to a point); but CNN definitely fits in this scheme.

To me, the most brazen recent example I can remember is their treatment of the Ebola scare back in 2014.

You'll recall that CNN almost singlehandadly turned what was obviously a matter of few isolated cases (of people who had been in Liberia, besides) into a nationwide panic - and kept pounding it until the elections.

And then, poof. Nary a word.

There is no question that McCocaine became Majority Leader thanks to the Ebola panic - which CNN was largely responsible for.

Real turnocoats, CNN.

[NanceGreggs]

10. Let's try staying on topic.

The OP states that "CNN is shilling for the GOP" by interviewing these five Republican women.

When did CNN claim that these were random, off-the-street women who had no affiliation with their party's political endeavours?

The answer is they didn't.

[sandensea]

13. Sure. They deliberately misled their viewers, and did so in a way that favors Kavanaugh.

That had to be calculated. Some of these women were paraded as everyday, cookie-baking people - when they certainly weren't.

Not knowing who they really were, whatever heavily rehearsed GOP talking points they recited thus sounded a lot more credible.

When we Democrats sometimes call Republicans pod people, this is what we mean. These people seem incapable of almost anything genuine.

[NanceGreggs]

15. How were viewers misled?

"Some of these women were paraded as everyday, cookie-baking people."

Exactly what is an "everyday, cookie-baking person"? And please point out where CNN called them any such thing.

Do you think that when Democratic women are interviewed, they are chosen from a group of "everyday, cookie-baking people"?

This is just silly. Of course these women are pro-Kavanaugh - they're Republicans. That was the point of the interview, showing what Republican women are saying about him.

[sandensea]

17. They weren't presented as the GOPee officials and fundraisers they were.

If CNN viewers had known that, eveything those ladies said would have been heard at in that context.

But by misleading people into thinking they were everyday Republican voters, like the kind one might run into at the grocery store (most likely in the mayonnaise aisle), whatever they had to say was thus presented as a disinterested personal opinion - rather than as rehearsed, focus group-honed spin by, basically, a politician.

That's journalistic malpractice. And one designed to benefit just one individual:

[NanceGreggs]

19. You are so off-base here ...

... it's like listening to a FOX-News adherent whining about Democrats having any airtime on their news outlet of choice.

I'll ask again: Please provide any facts that support your allegation that CNN presented these women as "everyday, cookie-baking" women" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean).

[Kaleva]

11. They were identified as Republican women

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/09/20/cnn_focus_group_of_republican_women_on_christine_blasey_fords_allegation_against_brett_kavanaugh.html

[sandensea]

12. Yes - but voters were led to believe these were everyday people, for that aw-shucks effect.

When they were anything but.

[NanceGreggs]

16. Please produce the facts ...

... that underpin your contention that CNN led anyone to believe that "these were everyday people" who had no affiliation with their party's activities.

Guess what? "Everyday people" - Republicans and Democrats alike - are quite often people who are active in their respective parties. They show up at political events, they canvass or phone-bank for their party's candidates, they participate in fund-raisers for the politicians they support.

I'm at a loss as to why you don't understand that.

[Kaleva]

18. You may have fell for it but I think most of us didn't.

[Lithos]

20. They were identified only as Republican

Instead of being part of the Republican machine itself.

Also, this style of mis-representation mainstreams views which are not held by the majority of people. Ie, it's a tactic done often by Faux news.

[NanceGreggs]

21. I will ask again.

At what point did CNN represent these women as anything other than Republicans expressing their views as Republicans?

If CNN depicted them as Republican women who have no affiliation with their party's political endeavours, please provide quotes whereby they did so.

TIA.

[Lithos]

22. CNN only introduced them as women who are Republicans

They did not identify them as being women who work for the Republican Party, it's officials, or affiliated/allied groups. There is a huge distinction between the two. Or should I post the picture of the "concerned citizens" during the Florida recount?

Three of the five women

Lourdes Castillo de la Pena - Appointee on the Florida Commission on the Status of Women by the Republican Governor. GOP Operator - who hosted $1000/plate sessions.
Irina Villarino - Trump supporter who was part of a photo-op roundtable he did for his Tax cuts.
Gina Sosa - Failed GOP candidate for the 27th Congressional District. Ran as an ultra-conservative. Appears semi-frequently on Fox and CNN.

Several of these women were also interviewed by the same reporter in a piece entitled _Is Trump in trouble with female voters_

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/02/13/female-trump-supporters-rob-porter-accusations-reaction-kaye-dnt-ac.cnn

Seems like an awfully biased "focus group". None of this was mentioned.

[NanceGreggs]

24. "CNN only introduced them as women who are Republicans."

Where was the dishonesty in identifying them as exactly that, "women who are Republicans"?

When did CNN identify them as "women who are Republicans who have no affiliation with their party's political events, and have never participated in said events"?

They were also not identified as being a "focus group".

CNN presented them as "Republican women" - nothing more, nothing less. And if you think Republican women were going to veer away from the "Kavanaugh is a great nominee" message, on CNN or elsewhere, you were the one who was "misled" by virtue of your own desire to hear only what you want to hear.

[Lithos]

25. CNN self-labeled as a focus group

At this point, I will not answer further, you and I are in complete disagreement. CNN failed transparency and presented a Republican commercial featuring known shills when they were implying an in depth look inside the average woman Republican's mind

The producers selected these people in advance knowing what they would say, they knew these women as they were in the Rolodex. The answers were a given.

[gabeana]

23. Does Lithos

Post answer your question? I watched when it happened and they were just mentioned as Republican women, I was disgusted and posted on DU and if they had mentioned that they were connected,run for office and fundraisers I would have mentioned it

[LuckyCharms]

2. "I have no sympathy for her"

The hallmark of a Republican.

[Sherman A1]

3. CNN is shilling for CNN

It's always about "the horse race" to keep your eyes on their Breathless 23/7 Cable Noise Infotainment long enough for them to get to the commercial for a drug you never knew you needed.

[BannonsLiver]

4. Indeed. Spot on.

Even the hurricane coverage has devolved into infotainment.

[triron]

14. That's why I don't watch CNN.

[Scurrilous]

6. K&R

[Separation]

7. Grrrr CHROME is acting up

For some reason Im unable to play any embedded video posted from Twitter.