Home / General / CNN’s Finest Hour

CNN’s Finest Hour

Comments
/
/
/
35 Views

CNN, why do you still exist? Your ratings are garbage and rotting daily. You don’t represent any constituency except for Beltway elites. You cover up for shoddy reporting and hackish analysis by investing in new technology that are meant to help us forget how bad you are. You whine about partisanship on FOX and MSNBC without actually producing quality coverage.

And then, after all that whining about the decline of cable news, you wrongly announce that the Supreme Court ruled to overturn Obamacare?

It’s gotten so bad that AP had to order its employees to stop making fun of you.

Christ, you’d all do better if you just handed Nancy Grace the keys to the building, let her talk about missing white women 24 hours a day.

But I’m sure that making your election night coverage 3-D will make us all forget this and start watching you again.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • CNN International is actually pretty good.

    • I’ve generally found it to be good as well. Quite different than domestic CNN. Probably because CNN International by and large actually covers the news and doesn’t worry so much about being properly centrist or whatnot.

      • Charlie Sweatpants

        CNN International is a news channel. Regular CNN is a gossip channel with a sideline in reporting the news.

        (Fantastic photoshop, by the way.)

      • This. I knew CNN International was good 5 minutes in, when they actually provided some in-depth and informative reports on developing news in Africa at the time (politics in South Africa and developments in the Sudan and Darfur, if I recall – this would have been back in 2006). Fortunately, they still maintain that type of coverage.

      • Pseudonym

        I misread that as “property centrist” or “property centric” but that works too.

  • Urban Garlic

    Thanks so much for posting this — I was _sure_ I’d loaded up a CNN page that said that this morning, but then a few minutes later, I could only find “upheld” stories.

    I may still be going crazy, but at least this time, I really did see it…

    • Sherm

      Assholes caused me tell my office that the law had been struck down.

  • You don’t understand, Erik. That CNN sent someone without even enough knowledge of the process they were covering to understand the distinction in the opinion between the commerce and taxation clauses is actually what makes CNN so awesome. Because everyone else enlisted people with at least a modicum of legal/SCOTUS knowledge, and that knowledge undoubtedly imbued them with evil, evil, opinions that undercut the essence of professional journamalism! Won’t anyone think of the journalists???!?!?!?!

    • +1

    • And I’m not making this up. You’d be scared shitless at the number of people with journalism degrees who have responded with abject horror when I say that the most important thing you need to have to be an effective journalist is knowledge of the topic you’re covering. Modern American journalism majors really do think they’re only purpose is to transcribe what important people say and write it up.

      • Since they’re often covering businessmen who think you only need to know management and not the product your company produces, it makes sense.

      • joe from Lowell

        Have you ever tried to get a journalist at a local newspaper to understand wetlands?

        Even if it’s the person who is assigned to cover the wetlands permit board ever month, you can still never, ever get them to understand what the hell is going on.

    • John

      It’s not that the person didn’t understand the distinction. It’s that they saw the statement that Roberts, writing for the court, found the mandate to be unauthorized under the commerce and necessary and proper clauses, and then didn’t bother to read further before jumping to the conclusion that the mandate was overturned

      • Or, in other words, they didn’t understand that they needed to keep reading.

        • Charlie Sweatpants

          CNBC not CNN, but it applies to pretty much all cable news:

          http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-march-8-2004/jack-ass-reporting

          That was eight years ago, and they still haven’t gotten any better.

        • John

          Well, yes. They obviously wanted to get the story out as quickly as possible and weren’t as careful as they should have been. I’m not sure this is evidence of ignorance so much as it is evidence of incompetence.

        • mark f

          You’d think that being on Page 2/193 of the PDF would’ve tipped him off.

      • Njorl

        CNN: First!

  • Reasonable 4ce

    What does Jeff This-Is-a-Trainwreck-for-the-Obama-Administration Toobin have to say about this?

    • I have no problem with Toobin not getting it right. I like Toobin by and large. I mean, who, other than Will Wilkinson for Christ’s sake, actually got this right?

      • John
      • Richard

        Toobin is good but in this case he made a wrong prediction. That happens. He knows his stuff and he wasn’t the one who leaped to the wrong conclusion this morning. (I think he was right that a decision overturning the law would have been a trainwreck – all praise to Chief Justice Roberts on this one)

      • elm

        elm, kind of. In some weird, throw out a catch-all prediction that includes but does not specify the actual outcome.

        elm
        WAS KINDA-RIGHT HEIGHTS, USA

        (send me my damn t-shirt, internets!)

      • Anderson

        Not even him. He thought Roberts would rule under CC/NPC.

        I anticipated a split CC/tax-power affirmance, but with Kennedy on the tax op, not Roberts.

        It seems like the dissent started out as the majority op, and Roberts flipped. Couldn’t pull the trigger, I guess.

        • John

          What’s the basis for the idea that Roberts flipped? I saw someone on Volokh saying that as well.

          • Richard

            Its that the dissent refers at several points to Ginzburg’s opinion as the “dissent”. Campos just wrote an article in Salon on that and posted it here but appears to hve taken it down. I don’t think its accurate. For one, the idea that Roberts wrote a 65 page opinion at the last moment is unlikely. And the parts of the dissent that refer to Ginzburg’s opinion as the dissent only refer to that portion of the opinion where she disagrees with Roberts.

    • Halloween Jack
  • joe from Lowell

    Easy there, big fella. Let’s not forget, CNN is the network that gave Campbell Brown her big break.

  • Lee

    Erik, the pic is really awesome.

    • tonycpsu

      Apparently, POTUS gets early access to unreleased Apple products like the 23″ iPad.

    • I got it off a friend on Facebook. I’m not nearly clever enough to come up with that myself.

      • rea

        The photoshop is now running on Huffington Post and the front page of aol without a credit to your friend–it’s said to be something from the internet . . .

        • Anderson

          It’s the HuffPo – they don’t pay their own writers, why would they give credit for a picture?

        • My friend didn’t create it himself.

    • Origuy

      Obama should totally get a suit like that.

  • Jay C

    In 1948, at least, the Chicago Tribune had a vaguely applicable excuse for their misleading headline (election results were a slower to be tabulated than nowadays, and the Trib had had two sets of headlines composed and ready to be printed: the editor waited until the last possible moment to start the presses, then went with the lede he thought the paper’s GOP wingnut publisher would appreciate. IIRC, at the cost of his job)

    But in today’s Instant-Everything world, what’s CNN’s excuse?

    • rea

      It never occured to the editor to run a headline saying, “Too close to call at presstime”

    • NonyNony

      Hey in this day and age everything is compressed. You can’t possibly expect a journalist to read 4 pages before coming up with a story, can you? I mean that extra minute might have cost them the scoop! And then they would have lost … bragging rights? Perhaps the other news agencies would have taunted CNN for being slow?

      Unlike the “Dewey Defeats Truman” scenario there is pretty much no excuse for not holding back on a story until you know it’s accurate in this day and age. We have 24×7 TV news coverage! We have web pages that can be updated instantly! We don’t need to make sure our story is ready to go by 1am so that the papers can get printed for delivery by 4am, and we don’t need to have stories ready to go by the 6pm news.

      CNN is working on an outdated model. So is most of the rest of the industry, they’re just better at it than CNN is.

      • Pseudonym

        Bloomberg: First!
        CNN: Frist!

  • Pingback: Photoshop of the day | thus blogged anderson()

  • fasteddie9318

    You don’t represent any constituency except for Beltway elites.

    This is blatantly untrue and I object to this complete smear on CNN. The fact of the matter is that they’ve worked very hard to expand their reach to Wall Street elites as well, also too.

It is main inner container footer text