I suppose I would agree if he was also reporting on it. But he is purposely NOT reporting on it.
I’m not sure every reporter can be expected to lead a totally bland life so they can be sure to never part of any story.
I’m not sure if I got the whole timeline right, but I think he was doing all that while he was still covering the story. The article by Margaret Sullivan also seemed to be saying the CNN management knew about this all along (or at least they knew that he was covering the story back when he still was) and they were okay with that.
To be sure, reporters can get caught up in a story, or even become the story.
There was a gruesome example 25-or-so years ago from Avila Beach, a small beach town near Pismo Beach, Ca. Three reporters were covering a beach-side festival. They had their trailer there, and they extended that tall antenna that you often see sticking up from reporters trailers. The antenna bumped into a power line, and semi-incinerated all three reporters inside. IIRC they all survived. One of them had to have three limbs amputated.
I can take a different tact. I don’t think it’s a good look to consult with someone who did something bad. Sure, if it’s your job, it’s not too big a deal. But that’s not the case here.
Sure, you might argue it would be okay if the advice is something like “You need to resign” or “here’s how to make things right.” But when you look at how Andrew acted about all of it, it looks a lot more like the advice would have been more along the lines of “here’s how to downplay this” or “here’s how to stay in power.”
It looks bad for Chris to be doing things with his brother at all right now, as people will be suspicious that, as his bother, he knew about this stuff. It’s better for him to steer clear of it all.
Thus I’d say it doesn’t really matter if he reports on it or not. His brother is in a scandal, and he should stay away to not be dragged into it. He can still live his life, but he should avoid getting involved in an ongoing scandal.
I could also just argue that it’s better for him to stay away because CNN is covering it. Since he works for CNN, anything he does reflects on CNN, unless they fire him or something.
The publisher only sold 50,000 copies of Cuomo’s book which it paid $5 million for.
So if Cuomo decides to write another book he will get a much smaller advance.
Chris and Andrew Cuomo are so famously brothers that I think there’s a strong desire to include both in the story somehow. If someone has a group photo of the brothers with a woman looking uncomfortable, it would be worth a pretty penny right now.
But based on only what we know currently, Chris has done pretty close to the right thing: not talked about the story, but addressed the elephant in the room. It’s not worth quibbling over the fact he gave his brother advice.
That’s about how I see it. No way should he be covering it on-air, and he hasn’t.
Then again: Brian Stelter says some people at CNN are 'ticked off' at Chris Cuomo: 'A wide range of opinions' [Video]
And here’s more on the next NYS chief exec: Kathy Hochul to become New York's 1st female governor after Cuomo resigns [Video]
The issue many have with Chris Cuomo is that he deliberately misled viewers.
In his 20 May broadcast, he admitted that he had advised his brother:
(see first source, below)
There’s a fairly clear implication that he was only ‘looped into calls.’ But later reporting paints a different picture:
(see second source, below)
So the issue is more about Chris Cuomo’s credibility–not so much about whether it’s proper for someone to give advice to a relative.
**
(My emphasis in the first quote.)
That’s some great research Sherrerd, but it doesn’t really change my opinion.
Chris didn’t talk about the story on air and told viewers why. He gave Andrew advice: nothing illegal, and nothing yet that seems like insider information at CNN versus general PR and journalism advice.
Yes, he probably should not have given any advice, but I just don’t see the seriousness of this, versus (and I don’t normally indulge in “whataboutism” but surely this time) the election corruption that ghosted through the news in one day.
It’s good Chris apologized, unlike his brother. For me I consider that much more than sufficient.
Fraternal bonds can be hard to break.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/25/us/sticking-by-a-murderous-brother-and-paying-for-it-dearly.html
He is a member of a media news outlet and he’s telling his brother how to spin this. If Andrew Cuomo is guilty of the accusations against him then it makes his brother appear to be an enabler. He will be tried in the court of public opinion. If convicted his ratings will suffer.
Well that depends on if Chris believed he was innocent or not, and whether the advice included apologizing and making it right (that is to say, he may have said “If what they are saying is true, you must do X, otherwise I recommend a press statement like Y”.
As the facts come out maybe things will be serious enough that Chris should resign. But, right now, it isn’t and Chris has apologized for his relatively small part.
I think it is possible, if not likely, that Chris doesn’t believe the allegations against his brother.
He hasn’t apologized for doing it, he’s apologized for being connected to CNN and doing it. He also said he was fiercely loyal to his family above his job. He’s making it harder to separate his brother from himself.
Isn’t that the thing he’s supposed to apologize for? I mean, if Andrew’s brother wasn’t a news media celeb, no-one would care if he gave his brother advice.
Is he supposed to be apologizing for trusting his brother? Or for giving perfectly legal, normal advice?
I’m lost here.
Again, the issue many have with Chris Cuomo is NOT that he gave advice to his brother. It’s that he deliberately misled viewers about the extent of his involvement in giving advice.
If people are fine with that, then they are fine with that. But credibility is important for news anchors.
Is giving two weeks notice when you quit a job not a thing anymore?
In this case, lost is a relative term.