Kurtz Brings on Right Wing Talker to Play Concern Troll for Lou Dobbs
By Heather Sunday Nov 15, 2009 6:00pm
From Reliable Sources, Howard Kurtz hosts a panel discussion on Lou Dobbs departure from CNN. I guess Howard thinks bringing in bullying, right wing, Rush Limbaugh wanna-be hack Chris Plante to concern troll for Dobbs somehow made this panel "balanced". All it did was make it ridiculous.
Plante uses an extremely broad brush to throw around accusations of "liberal" media bias. Anyone think Campbell Brown who's married to Dan Senor is a "liberal". Or that Larry King is an "opinion show"? Or that Chip Reid is any less of a Villager hack than the rest of them out there just because he worked for Joe Biden? Or George Stephanopoulos because he worked for Clinton but subjects us to endless interviews with McCain since he lost the election and George Will's sour mug every week? Liberal my ass. Plante also defends Dobbs for both his anti-immigrant rants and birther rhetoric.
Transcript via CNN.
KURTZ: Chris Plante, many liberals cheering Dobbs' sudden exit. A "New York Times" editorial called him close to a right wing ranter who distorts the facts. Is the media being fair to Lou Dobbs?
PLANTE: Well, of course not. Well the reason Lou Dobbs was in trouble is not because he has opinions, it's because of what his opinions were and his opinions are out of lockstep with the rest of the mainstream news media. "The New York Times" in their -- pretty much every report also say that he's a crusader against immigrants, or immigration and that's false. It's a misrepresentation and it speaks to their point of view. And maybe "The New York Times" should be taking a look at itself rather than Lou Dobbs.
KURTZ: Eric Deggans, Dobbs for years was a conventional business anchor, but do you believe in recent years that he became more of a crusader than a journalist?
DEGGANS: I think it's obvious and I could not disagree more with your previous panelist's assertions. It became obvious that Lou was pressing this world view about illegal immigration being at the root of a ton of evils in America, and I think a lot of his conclusions were debatable.
"60 Minutes" exposed that he had said things about illegal immigrants causing a rise in leprosy in the United States that just could not be backed up. And he's also made assertions of the criminality of illegal immigrants that statistics just don't bear out. So opinions are one thing, but to be unfair and to make assertions that are not true or to exaggerate using selective data, that is just not something that's very ethical and very fair or anything that helps anyone.
KURTZ: David Zurawik, whether Dobbs was opinionated on the left or the right, he was a very opinionated guy in recent years. CNN doesn't style itself as that kind of operation. Could they have continued this sort of uneasy co-existence?
ZURAWIK: No, it's impossible. You know, by July I think I was writing he's a liability, you have to get rid of them. And even, Howie, forget the larger sense. Just in a business sense, in terms of the CNN brand, Dobbs was a disaster with the birther controversy this summer, first of all, cut against it.
And secondly, you know, CNN has "Latinos in America" coming out, really fine series that they had with Soledad O'Brien. At the same time, they're being protested by Latino groups because of Dobbs' positions. How can you function that way? Listen, I think Jonathan Klein has made a really important stand with this culture with the kind of news he's trying to do.
KURTZ: Just to clarify, CNN president Jon Klein said that he had asked Dobbs several months ago to take the opinion off his program and Dobbs had largely complied. But Lou ultimately was unhappy and decided to cut the cord.
PLANTE: That's why he's gone. Let's boil it down to the facts here. It's not that Campbell Brown is completely neutral. Anderson Cooper is completely neutral. Larry King is completely neutral.
KURTZ: Wait, let me finish the question. Are you suggesting that those hosts lean to the left?
PLANTE: Yes, I am.
KURTZ: In anything like the degree that Lou Dobbs?
PLANTE: So it's a matter of degrees? It's also a matter of bounty. It's also a matter of what the reality -- of course, you're not.
ZURAWIK: Of course I don't because it's a fact, that's why I don't agree with you! I couldn't --
PLANTE: And the news media -- I'm supposed to be the radio talk show host and you're the newspaper guy here. In Washington, we've got a chief White House correspondent for CBS News Chip Reid who was a former employee on Capitol Hill of Joe Biden. We've got a senior White House correspondent of NBC News who was a former staffer for Tom Harkin.
KURTZ: Let's stick to CNN.
PLANTE: We have a senior Washington correspondent for ABC News who is a Clinton administration official. David Axelrod is a former "Chicago Tribute" reporter. We've got Jay Carney leaving his job at "Time" magazine to go to work for this administration. Look, the pattern is clear, everybody knows it except you guys, you know?
KURTZ: What does it is say about CNN? None of those people work at CNN.
PLANTE: It's the news media as an industry and as a company, the last conservative voice on the channel is gone. They had Glenn Beck, he's gone. They had him, now he's gone. Lou Dobbs is gone.
DEGGANS: Is it possible for someone else to break here?
KURTZ: I'm going to let you break in, but I want to play some sound for you, and then tee it up for you. Zurawik mentioned the birther controversy that really erupted over the summer, was President Obama really born in this country? Lou had some things to say on that, too. Let's roll the tape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: We've been reporting on the accusations widespread on the Internet that President Obama wasn't actually born in the United States and therefore some believe he's not eligible to be president. It's out there. There are those who claim that he was born, Dom, in a different country. The president, obviously, all he has to do is just produce the original birth certificate in Hawaii and be done with it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KURTZ: And unlike illegal immigration, Eric Deggans, where a lot of people in this country feel passionately against that, this birth thing is pretty fringe stuff.
DEGGANS: Yes, and it's surprising, if you actually look at the ratings for his show, they really took a hit when he started talking about the birther controversy. I think it's obvious that he started to go further and further out on a limb with some of these conspiracy theories and he left some of his viewers behind.
I would also note that the problem with opinionated anchors isn't the opinion, it's when they are not accurate. It's when they say things that are false. It's when they say things that are not fair. That's when there's the biggest problem and we've seen this over and over again with certain news outlets and I think that was Dobbs' biggest problem and what drew the biggest protest. And I'll also say Diane Sawyer is about to become the top anchor on ABC News and she once worked for the Nixon administration.
PLANTE: It's been 30 years.
DEGGANS: It's obvious that there are lots of people in journalism who used to work in politics on both sides of the aisle and what you have to do is look at their work and not look at where they came from.
PLANTE: Right, OK, well, I've got to say, this is an essentially an attack on Lou Dobbs. Let's call it what Lou Dobbs said. Lou Dobbs raised a question. I saw him raise questions that a lot of people are asking out there. Do you know who Chiyome Fukimo is, either one of you?
ZURAWIK: Chris, if a lot of people are asking the question, they weren't watching him. This is not some ratings juggernaut. Lou Dobbs was finishing third in his time period. This was not some great populous groundswell of support for what he was doing.
PLANTE: Based on that standard, there are a lot of other anchors who would be gone, too, aren't they, but they're not gone, are they?
ZURAWIK: Chris, this is also about trying to run a news organization. Jonathan Klein fired a nice shot across his bow back in July. If an editor did that to me, I would stop being a hot dog gas based stop off guy like Lou Dobbs and I might think about reining it in. You can't run a news organization with somebody --
PLANTE: You represent -- you're a media writer for a newspaper, for a Baltimore newspaper and you represent the mainstream news media point of view.
ZURAWIK: Which is what?
PLANTE: And this goes right to my point. Howard, you know that every survey --
ZURAWIK: I think that is the mainstream point of view.
PLANTE: You know that every survey that's ever been taken involving the politics of the news media finds it between 85 and 95 percent of the news media votes Democratic, goes along with the liberal agenda and newsrooms are stocked with this point of view. Now --
KURTZ: I want to come back to your point, do you contend that Campbell Brown and Larry King and Anderson Cooper, that their programs are built around their personal opinions to the extent that "Lou Dobbs Tonight" was?
PLANTE: Now you're going by a different standard.
KURTZ: It's what you do on the air.
PLANTE: Let me tell you something. I was having a conversation with a friend of mine in Washington, a longtime Washington journalist type and we were talking about a reporter that we both know who is very liberal. And my friend said, yes but I think that he does a great job of hiding it. The idea is not to have a room full of people who are hiding their political beliefs and failing, by the way. Lou Dobbs wore it on his sleeve and he at least put it out there. You knew where he stood unlike others.
KURTZ: Eric, I'm sorry that we have slighted you. Let's move the conversation to you can say whatever you want about Dobbs, but by naming John King, my colleague at "State of the Union" to take over the 7 p.m. slot that Dobbs has now vacated, is CNN doubling down on straight news and is that a good strategy?
DEGGANS: Well, of course it seems obvious that by replacing Dobbs with someone who doesn't present the opinions the way that he did, that there may be a return to more standard reporting and more objective analysis. But one of the things I wanted to talk about is I'm concerned that we're losing the forest for the trees here.
DEGGANS: One of the things that we've seen increasingly in modern -- in present years is the presentation of news that fits the world view of the audience that wants to watch it.
And when the news gets distorted to fit someone's world view, regardless of what that world view is, there's a problem. The problem with Dobbs wasn't necessarily that he was expressing conservative views; it was that he was distorting facts and distorting the situation to fit the world view that he wanted to present to his viewers.
And that's also a problem. You know, David and I have written about this as it relates to Fox News or as it relates to MSNBC, at times. When -- when the news is distorted to fit a world view to draw viewers, that's when we have a problem.
KURTZ: In fairness, Dobbs did correct some of those mistakes. And here is my two cents. I've been on Dobbs's program. He's been on this program. It's not about his opinions. He has a lot of them. He's a smart guy. He can say what he wants. It's about CNN wanted to be. And there increasingly was just a divergent path between Lou's opinionated approach to the world and CNN saying it was going to be -- it was going to market itself as the straight news network.
Now, I think a divorce was inevitable. Now Lou can run around the country, raise money, speak to groups, say whatever he wants on the face of the earth and CNN can get back to journalism.
I think CNN tries to be fair. Chris Plante may disagree -- former CNN correspondent, here -- but we're going to leave it there. David Zurawik, Chris Plante, Eric Deggans, thanks very much for joining us.
Login or Register to post comments.
about any of the talking asshats today. What a worderful day!
The consumer wins. I stopped consuming CNN. Say whatever you like CNN, but them's the facts. I got tired of your shitty "news".
I think you're right to some extent that the consumer wins, esp in this whole TV ratings game. There was this mega campaign online against Dobbs and I think that did quite a bit to force him out. Maybe someone should start something against Plante too? Btw, did you'll see how Stewart compared him to Palin and how he's going rogue like her? http://*******/6R172 Hilarious!
Plante; "politics of the news media finds it between 85 and 95 percent of the news media votes Democratic, goes along with the liberal agenda and newsrooms are stocked with this point of view. "
It always gets back to that old saw, the liberal media, which hasn't seen the light of day since the Reagan administration, picking on the poor defenseless conservative windbags with their shows of misinformation.
To Fox, Limpy, Mike Raygoon, Liddy, Savage and the AM hate radio poop eaters;
F*CK OFF LOSERS!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDNM2rnoUdw
These hateful bastards believe that they can define everything and everybody.
Heh, that is indeed a ridiculous canard.
Arguing that the media is liberal because most of its reporters tend to vote Democratic is like arguing that a restaurant that serves French food is really a Mexican restaurant because its chef and kitchen staff prefer to eat Mexican food at home.
The reason the media people are mostly liberal, is the same as the reason most educators are liberal: it takes a certain type of person to want to do that job. Conservatives with skills go for the money jobs, not the ones that help people. Liberals want to help others learn, and help to inform others. Even a neutral observer as a reporter eventually sees the hypocrisy and unfairness of the system and starts to favor the majority. The ones who don't, sell out to the corporatists for personal gain. They are in the minority.
I used to watch Dobbs, and he seemed like he was against corporate power and outsourcing jobs, putting Americans out of work. Then he became increasingly anti-Latino, and that I didn't like. The last straw was this Mr. Independent crap, as the election approached. He and his fans seemed to say "We're better than both Democrats AND Republicans". It was a pseudo-elitism that really meant they were unable to draw clear distinctions between the two parties, and choose one or the other.
The Democrats are not perfect, but after the years from 1994 to 2006, it should be easy for people to see the direction the country was headed, and conclude that having the Republicans in charge was selling out labor, and creating an aristocracy, or more accurately, an aris-kleptocracy.
Is plante a description of his mental capacities as well?
That is totally out of line.
Plants serve a useful function.
KURTZ: In fairness, Dobbs did correct some of those mistakes. And here is my two cents. I've been on Dobbs's program. He's been on this program. It's not about his opinions. He has a lot of them. He's a smart guy. He can say what he wants. It's about CNN wanted to be. And there increasingly was just a divergent path between Lou's opinionated approach to the world and CNN saying it was going to be -- it was going to market itself as the straight news network.
Get a grip, Howie. Lou was an opinionated bigot that represented a small but angry and vocal minority. And CNN the "straight news network?" What laughable garbage. That concept died decades ago.
And if Dobbs was really smart, he would have sincerely apologized for his radical and inappropriate agenda and moderated himself. Nobody can speak with impunity forever and not expect to be held accountable.
Dobbs was a rating whore who took his obscene agenda too far. And he paid the price for it---as he should. Someday, people like you that enable this behavior by soft pedaling the real effect will get yours, too.
I did not watch the clip, but I have funny feeling no one asked Kurtz about Dobb's rants about the illegals bringing leperosy into the country.
It was an intentional omission because Howie did not want to offend his authoritarian corporate masters. He'll just toe the approved party line, just like Pravda did for the Soviets.
"Liberal my ass..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4he79krseU
But if you take away concern trolling and outlandish conspiracy theories, what does the right have at this point?
Besides the racism.
And the myth of a liberal media was pretty thoroughly demolished last year when the GOP ran a presidential and vice presidential team that both tended to say things that were demonstratably not true pretty much constantly.
Let's define OPINIONS for a second here:
I like the color blue. My wife likes the color red. My son wears black whenever he can. That's an opinion. Nothing right or left or wrong or upside down. Just a difference of opinion.
I like 72 degrees, or maybe 74 degrees. My sister thinks anything under 80 degrees is cold. I think we have a difference of "Opinion".
I prefer a good Rib Eye steak for dinner. My wife prefers chicken. Without the debates on the merits of which meat source is best, I consider this an opinion of flavor and taste.
I like Chevrolet automobiles. My wife drives a Chrysler. Is that an opinion? I think so.
Now let's discuss facts. 2 + 2 = 4. That is not an opinion, but a solid fact.
When facts are distorted, when information is intentionally slanted, when significant information is omitted for a specific bias, then the concept of "Opinion" is no longer a valid point. Politics may have opinions, but mostly it's lies and distortions vs truth and facts.
Call BS when you see it. If the facts are presented honestly and fully, then opinions rarely have an effect.
Plante's gameplan: If you don't have any facts, just shout over the other guests, and interrupt.
CNN was good when it first started and was owned Ted Turner , my opinion , but it's typical corporate garbage now , no real journalism , no tough , honest and straight reporting , just a waste of the air waves . " Keeping them honest " , yeah right , half the time they don't even have their facts straight . MSNBC is the only news I watch these days . As for Dobbs , sooner or later he will sign on with the Fox propaganda channel ... right where he belongs , that's my bet .
Lou wore his political ideology on his sleeve huh?Gee what a hero.
So did let's see..Dan Rather?Phil Donahue?What ever happened to them I wonder...BTW while it's true that a majority of journalists lean Left,most publications and editors do not.
Howard Kurtz is married to Sheri Annis, a Republican strategist. CNN stands for Compromised News Network.
Sheri Anus?
Edited out, removed to proper thread.
I find these convesations increasingly ludicrious. They always try to put things in a neat little "right" or "left" box. I find it increasingly difficult to tell what is suppossively "right" and "left" these days. Particularly, when refering to political parties and even more difficult when refering to journalists. The "right" or those that call themselves conservative have a habit of labelling anyone a "liberal" or "leftist", if they disagree with them, even those in their own party or cause, even though they contradict and are hypocritical themselves all the time. They also think they own the issues of say religion or national security, when they are quite often contradictory and wrong about both. Or say that anyone that is for the environment or for peace is a "lefty". Makes no sense.
I think the biggest problem, as mentioned in this article is not "left" and "right", but just all the lying and misrepresentations of the facts. The problem with "news" is it has gotten away from the "facts" and some actual investigation.
Out of all the talking heads, Maddow seems to be one of the few who actually does any digging. Question, when was the last time you have seen, or has there ever been, any investigative journalism on FOX. I would love to see FOX go over to say Afghanistan and tell us what is really going on or do an in-depth report on the state of the healthcare system in America. Do you see this? No! I wonder why, for a company that calls itself "news". Doesn't matter if they have a "right" slant, just go do the work and tell us what you see. The problem is they do not do the work. Dobbs also did not do any real investigative journalism. His idea of investigative journalism was to bring on extremists that supported his narrative. He never actually went out and talked to illegal immigrants or go to the countries they come from to find out why they are here, how many are here, and what exactly are they doing. He just simply most of the time did not have a really good understanding of the facts and the issues because Dobbs did not do the work. He had his own narrative, for whatever reason, and tried to make the "news" programming fit the narrative. I thougt journalism was suppose to be the other way around.
More proof that either Reslugs are just damn brainless, blind or they're born habitual liars.
Or any of the IDIOTS they still employ there???????
The main problem, as pointed out by Bill Moyers a few years ago, is not the opinions of pundits. It is that news organizations have decided to give pundits airtime in lieu of actually doing any reporting.
How could Dobbs' bile get any toehold in the American political discourse if the audience was well informed on the immigration issues based upon actual reporting.
We are suffering the results of the 24 hour news cycle as distorted by the coverage of the OJ case, the JonBenet case, etc... Starting in the mid nineties, we started tuning into more and more shows with "experts" on them. The news companies discovered that this was a cheap and profitable way to operate, so now that's all we get. We get "experts" who don't do any independent reporting - they just form opinions in their stupid little heads about things that they once studied decades ago in grad school.
Login or Register to post comments.