A question for those who watch Cooper on a regular basis:
On the few occasions when i’ve watched him previously, he’s always seemed pretty lightweight, usually heading up some feel-good story. For that reason, i never really make the time to seek him out. Is the interview linked in the OP typical of his style in political stories? Because if it is, then i might need to watch him more often.
We really do need more journalists willing to actually question and probe the politics and the motivations of their sources. I’m sure it’s coincidence rather than blind partisanship that magellan01 just happened to grab this particular story as an example of good journalistic practice, but it is a good example, and shows that even a blind squirrel stumbles across a nut once in a while.
But is this Cooper’s usual MO, as an interviewer? Is he, as Algher claims, someone we can “trust to actually push hard with real questions at both sides of the aisle”?
It’s worth noting, too, that there are fewer consequences for a journalist who pushes an organization like MoveOn than for a journalist who pushes hard when interviewing an actual, bona fide politician. These people control access to the halls of power, and if you show yourself willing to really push them hard, they simply won’t come on your show anymore. When journalistic strategy is dictated by the pressures of access, the quality of journalism is bound to suffer.
Well, the timestamp on the video is from May, so I doubt it. 'Course, Cooper wasn’t really that “in” to begin with.
I must say that this clip is contrary to impression I’d had of CNN. I’d never thought that they were biased (because you need an agenda to be biased); I’d just had the impression that they’d let any talking head come on the air and say whatever they want without being challenged.
ETA:
That’s why Jon Stewart is the most trusted “journalist” in America right now: If he burns a few bridges in the course of conducting a tough interview, he can still get Louis C.K. or whomever to come on his show the next day. The threat of loss of access isn’t as effective against him.
Well, this did cause me to pause and think, I paused and thought “When did I totally forget about MoveOn.org?” I remember there being a time when they were like a clearing house for lefty news. I checked on them pretty often. Can’t remember the last time.
So, anyway, what’s his face totally crushed MoveOn? Well, OK. Just because he’s gay and has no tits, doesn’t make him Rachel Maddow. Whatever.
I think it’s great, actually. When the bigger story is that the news is about the news acting like news for a change, rather than whatever the agenda of that MoveOn guy was whining about.
Who knows, maybe this whole “just the facts” thing will catch on because of ratings?..
I’m sure I could find examples of myself saying something to Der Trihs or Diogenes or Commissar or Chumpsky along the lines of “Geez, pal, you sure are reveling in imagined glory, there.”
Before I go to the effort, though, I’d like to know if money is involved.
Actually, in hindsight, the most communistic anti-individualism sentiment I’ve ever seen expressed on this board, in the sense of being to the greatest possible degree in opposition to the writings of Ayn Rand, came from OMG a Black Conservative, of all people. I asked him some follow-up questions, in case he was kidding or had misspoken… and it was not the case.
Go through all the effort it’s worth to you. If you think you’re posts demonstrate that you are more interested in “thoughtful political and social criticism” in the Pit as opposed to just cheering for your side, then knock yourself out.
And just to be clear, you’re are hardly the worst offender here. I just happened to pick up on your post in this thread.
Well, five times and you get a non-partisan gold star. Get ten of those, gets you a Certifcate of Objectivity, and John Mace will record the greeting on your home answering machine or voice mail.