The cable news channel CNN has been hammered from all sides about its recent Town Hall program with former president Donald J. Trump. On the one hand, it should be normal for a news show to host any obvious contender in the 2024 presidential race, but CNN management blundered by including a live studio audience. The always irreverent Trump turned the affair into an impromptu political rally.
Trump has been very adept at exploiting the weaknesses and ambitions of America’s news media. The rise of social media and the consolidation of traditional news media have savaged coverage of local news, helping to “nationalize” news reporting in terms of issues and creating a vast communication gap between deliverers of news and their audiences. Although inundated with “information,” the American public struggles to evaluate what they receive as “news” in terms of either aptness or veracity.
When Chris Licht took over the job of CNN’s CEO, he indicated the desire to restore waning public trust in the news media. He described that process in part as “fearlessly speaking truth to power…while always being respectful of differing viewpoints.” He also has actively sought to change the negative perception of CNN among Republicans.
That may have been Licht’s intention in setting up the Trump appearance. The result was not likely what he had expected.
CNN did score a ratings victory of sorts with the Trump interview, drawing 3.1 million viewers according to Nielson. It was the most watched cable news network during the primetime that evening. It was not, however, the most watched show on cable. Game five of the NBA playoff series between Golden State Warriors and Los Angeles Lakers on TNT drew more than twice the audience, 7.55 million viewers.
When Licht announced that Kaitlan Collins would do the Trump interview, he described his star news anchor as “a smart and gifted journalist who we’ve all seen hold lawmakers and newsmakers accountable. She pushes politicians off their talking points, gets real answers---and as everyone who’s worked with her knows---breaks a lot of news.” Licht apparently had never seen Trump in action.
Collins soldiered on despite the hectoring from the Trump partisans in the raucous crowd and the rudeness of her guest, but she could never puncture his wall of lies. Trump was able to parry her relevant probes with ad hominem attacks on her and the usual assortment of his enemies---the media, the FBI, the Deep State, women, etc., cheered on by the CNN-provided studio audience. She deserved better as did the viewing public.
Having been a newsman, although in a much earlier and less frenetic era, I appreciate how difficult it can be to control the dialogue when dealing with an aggressive and determined interviewee. Trump, a loquacious and cunning showman, does not engage in any respectful discussion. He is always in the attack mode and is relentless in exploiting the prejudices of the crowd.
Unfortunately, there is no one in the American media today that enjoys the public approbation that in an earlier time backed Edward R Murrow or Walter Cronkite. When US Senator Joe McCarthy used a campaign of fear and suspicion in the 1950s that threatened the right of dissent in this country, Murrow produced a program based on audio and film clips of McCarthy’s own words to demonstrate the threat of his unprincipled paranoia to American democracy. Cronkite in the late 1960s had the courage to challenge a sitting president locked in pursuit of an unwinnable war.
Today, the corporatization of media in all its forms has produced for the most part shallow celebrity news anchors with big paychecks and little incentive to challenge public officials with serious investigative reporting. This is tragic.
In a democracy professional journalists are needed to inform the public about important political issues as well as about the qualifications and traits of candidates for public office. This requires a relevant knowledge base and a genuine level of independence. At the same time, however, a responsible journalist cannot be an “advocate.”
Maintaining this balance can be difficult, for no one can study an important issue without forming in their own mind some opinion as to how it should be addressed. The journalist must be constantly aware of this circumstance and actively seek to be fair in his commentary.
In the case of Donald J. Trump this can be a real challenge. That Trump cannot manage the responsibilities of the US Presidency is clear from his track record as the nation’s chief executive. During the Trump years many government agencies did not have experienced effective leadership. When there were active appointees, they frequently pursued objectives inconsistent with the purpose of their agency---the Department of Education, for example.
Trump himself was an obstacle to informed government policy. Seeking to rule by tweet, he failed to offer reasonable proposals for serious issues and kept the country’s politics and economy in a state of constant turmoil. That some of his most grievous actions did not result in impeachment is another indictment of our current political polarization.
Still, Trump’s status as a presidential contender in 2024 cannot be ignored by the American news media. But there is no requirement that a news show give him a platform from which to conduct a political rally. Live audiences are a detriment to efforts to force any political candidate to discuss issues in a thoughtful and realistic manner. This is true for interviews and debates.
If a politician feels the need to speak to a crowd, he, or she, should assemble that crowd on his, or her, own. Professional journalists cannot do their job if their questions are being drowned out by the prejudices of live audiences.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/tv-ratings-wednesday-may-10-2023-1235485680/
https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/the-chris-licht-era-at-cnn-begins-today/506480/
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzGsmhWhXcqLglXmJfJMHScQpkTn
https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2017/03/journalists-vs-tyrants-murrow-crushes-mccarthy/