CNN Calls for Press to Ditch Objectivity, Portray GOP as Threat to the Country

CNN continued to escalate its dangerous rhetoric against Republicans on Sunday, as so-called “Reliable sources” host Brian Stelter and LA TimesJackie Calmes, columnist, demanded that the media abandon objectivity and portray Republicans as threats to the nation. She even claimed that’s not what she wanted to do while she actively called for it.

Unironically, the demand followed multiple segments praising Facebook for dividing us and making us hate our neighbors. Perhaps CNN or Stelter were afraid about the competition.

“I want to dive right into your argument about what both-siderism is and why it’s failing the public. Who’s – who’s – Does it mean that Republicans and Democrats are treated equally? Or is the core of the problem that Republicans and Democrats don’t get along with GOP radicalism?” Stelter prefaced, noting Calmes recent column titled: “Why journalists are failing the public with ‘both-siderism’ in political coverage”

She seemed immediately optimistic that “There is no doubt that reporters are becoming more aware of radicalization in the Republican Party.” Speaking more on that purported radicalization, Calmes suggested “It is not an entirely new problem..”

Her assessment is that the process of radicalization had been going on for over 25 years.

And I tried to always – I think I’m a very fair reporter and give both sides of the story. But what started to happen back in the mid-’90s with the takeover of the House by House Republicans – and in particular Newt Gingrich – was a new, nasty – I mean, his byword was ‘be nasty’ and norm-busting and obstructionist sort of governance. You can’t call that governance. It was, however, a precursor to Trump.

 

 

Explaining the “simplistic” understanding of “both-siderism,” Calmes suggested it was out of date to treat both parties the same and admit they do similar things and act in similar ways. “And for years, that was sort of simplistically, that was — I was able to do that and everyone else was able to do that. But by increasingly from 1995 on, no, it was asymmetric as the political scientists call it and it was more descriptive of Republicans than Democrats,” she asserted.

Stelter then invoked her book Dissent to talk about “the descent of the GOP” and wondered if what the two of them were calling for “causes more alienation, right, and causes Republican readers to just dismiss all of the coverage.”

Calmes defended herself by suggesting that she wasn’t calling the end of objective reporting. “And I have to say, that some of the response I got that was critical to that column suggested that I was saying we shouldn’t be objective anymore, we shouldn’t be fair and balanced. Of course, we should,” she claimed.

But back in reality, abandoning objectivity was exactly what she and Stelter were demanding. And she doubled down on it:

I just think an objective and fact-based treatment of the news often means you can’t report something that Republicans are doing without – and suggest that this is indicative of a broad or more general problem in our politics without being clearer somehow that it is, no, this is peculiar to Republicans, this is the nature of the Republican Party.

“And I think it’s rooted in a dynamic in which the Republican Party, which at the beginning of my career proudly was a small government party – styled itself that way – is now an anti-government party. And which means it doesn’t really care if government works well,” she lied.

That was a lie because much of the GOP still wanted the government to work well within the limited enumerated powers as written in the Constitution. And that’s not to mention the ongoing debate within the party where some wanted a bigger government but for what they thought was important.

Calmes concluded by admitting that this all stemmed from her fear of former President Trump, and Stelter agreed it was an important factor.

Last week, Stelter concluded his show with a segment about how his family was threatened with violence last year after the election. What happened to him and his family was wrong, but he doesn’t seem to care about how the rhetoric spewed on his show can result in similar actions being taken against people on the right.

This blatant call to abandon objectively and smear Republicans was made possible because of lucrative sponsorships from Amazon and Blue Cross Blue Shield. Their contact information is linked so you can tell them about the biased news they fund.

The transcript is below, click Calmes, “both-siderism”:expand” to read:

CNN’s Reliable Sources
October 24, 2021
11:31:22 a.m. Eastern

BRIAN STELTER: I want to dive right into your argument about what both-siderism is and why it’s failing the public. Who’s – who’s – Is it that we’re treating Democrats and Republicans equally and ignoring GOP radicalism, is that the heart of the problem?

JACKIE CALMES: In a sense. I mean, there’s no question that journalists are recognizing the radicalization of the Republican Party. I think what’s changed a little bit since Trump left office, there’s more of a sense that maybe we’re back to normal. But it is, you know, this is not a new problem or a new, you know, dynamic.

I first started to chafe — you mentioned I was at The New York Times. Well, for 18 years before that I was at The Wall Street Journal.

STELTER: Yeah.

CALMES: I’ve never done my job – you know, it’s more than a quarter century – I’ve never done my job or did when I was a reporter any differently at both papers, even though the Journal is known as a conservative paper, The New York Times is a liberal paper. They both gave news the same way, which was fact-based.

And I tried to always – I think I’m a very fair reporter and give both sides of the story. But what started to happen back in the mid-’90s with the takeover of the House by House Republicans – and in particular Newt Gingrich – was a new, nasty – I mean, his byword was be nasty and norm-busting and obstructionist sort of governance. Well, you couldn’t really call it governance that sort of was a precursor for Trump.

And it was, you know – When both-sidesism is sort of like, you know – to be simplistic about it – you say well, you reported something that’s somewhat critical of Republicans, then you sort of have to say something along the lines of, “but, both sides do it. Democrats are guilty as well.”

For years that was kind of simple, I was capable to do this and all others were able. But by increasingly from 1995 on, no, it was asymmetric as the political scientists call it and it was more descriptive of Republicans than Democrats.

STELTER: And you cover this in your book Dissent showing, it’s called Dissent but it’s also The decline of the GOP.

CALMES: It is.

STELTER: With that in mind, you say reporters are starting to get it, you get more to this. You think reporters are getting it right more often but that causes more alienation, right, causes Republican readers to just dismiss all of the coverageYou can contact them at. So, is it – Is this is a vicious cycleI. How do you – where do you see us going, Jackie?

CALMES: It is difficult It is difficult. We should.

I just think an objective and fact-based treatment of the news often means you can’t report something that Republicans are doing without – and suggest that this is indicative of a broad or more general problem in our politics without being clearer somehow that it is, no, this is peculiar to Republicans, this is the nature of the Republican Party.

And I think it’s rooted in a dynamic in which the Republican Party, which at the beginning of my career proudly was a small government party – styled itself that way – is now an anti-government party. This means that it doesn’t care if government functions well. And, in truth, when a Democrat is elected president, they try their best to prevent government from working well because that’s what they believe politically.

So, I just think the one thing that made me write that column is a sense that there has been – like I said at the outset – people feeling like, “well, without Trump in the picture, we’re sort of back to normal.” And, in fact, we’re not. Trump is still the leader of his party. His beat is being followed by the Republicans in Congress. He, too, remains in the picture, and could possibly be elected again as president one day.

STELTER: This is a present-tense tale, not past-tense. I completely agree.

About Post Author

Follow Us