Testing the Boundaries of Balanced Reporting

By Jakob Emerson

Anderson Cooper lit the internet news scene ablaze in May 2017 when he set foot into territory rarely explored by television journalists before.

During an airing of the CNN show “Anderson Cooper 360°,” in which guest Kellyanne Conway defended President Trump’s move to fire former FBI Director James Comey, Cooper dared to roll his icy blues on camera, subsequently disrespecting his guest and demonstrating a clear demeanor of disagreement.

“It’s not something I consciously did and I want to be respectful to anybody I interview,” Cooper said on a live taping of Bravo’s “Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen.” “I absolutely regretted it.”

The interaction between CNN’s arguably most well-known anchor with Conway, counselor to the president, raises the question: Why do news media organizations invite guests that they undoubtedly know will issue flagrant falsehoods and deliberately lead the conversation away from the overarching goal of receiving accurate information from the White House?

“They’re in a jam,” said Dean Baquet, Executive Editor of The New York Times. “They want people on television to talk for the president. They have a billion liberal commentators who want to come on and trash the president. How do you find people who say the president is right and who have credibility?”

The most recent example of this type of interview aired April 28 on Jake Tapper’s CNN show “State of the Union,” in which Conway left Tapper with no choice but to interrupt her lengthy monologues multiple times. Tapper discussed the president’s comment of “fine people on both sides” after a Neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017, but Conway twisted her way out of the argument and left Tapper sputtering his critiques. She did so by continually shifting the focus of the discourse and shuffling the timeline of the president’s actions.

Ultimately, Tapper appears to lose the argument. Now this is not to assume that the host did not come prepared with piercing questions and a developed ability to hunt for precise answers, but Conway is a master at spinning an indefensible position into a public relations victory. This mastery leads us once again to the question: Why do cable news networks book guests like Conway, even if she is one of the few individuals left to speak on behalf of the president?

It’s a question even late-night talk show hosts, such as Stephen Colbert, have asked Tapper directly.

“Kellyanne Conway,” Colbert said. “Why have her on TV? She is a collection of deceptions with a blonde wig stapled on top.”

Tapper replied without a smile, “I think that sometimes it’s worth it to have people on so you can challenge the very notion of the facts that are being disregarded and the lies that are being told.”

Lourdes Duarte, a WGN-TV news anchor, stated similarly, “You have to give them a platform and the ability to talk about the issues or be able to question them because they’re an important part of the story,” she said. “You need to do your best to verify the information they’re giving you. You need to be able to go back and forth with them.”

However, some would argue that the sentiment of giving a platform to a factually reckless opponent only fuels a post-truth era of propaganda and the rise of “alternative facts,” an infamous phrase coined by Conway herself.

The central ethical tenet of fair journalism also happens to be the root of the problem. CNN, and other outlets such as MSNBC, invite guests like Conway, and even pay Trump spokespeople such as Corey Lewandowksi, because they are networks that adhere to balanced reporting. The problem is that the Conways of the world are keenly aware of this ethical dilemma.

Evidence of this was present in a May 2018 interview on Brian Stelter’s CNN show “Reliable Sources,” in which he grilled Conway about the then-ongoing Mueller investigation into Trump campaign contacts with Russia.

By the end of the contentious debate, in which Conway accused Stelter of trying to “get the president,” she said “Just say it. Because I know your viewers expect that now. Look at their comments all the time, ‘Don’t have Trump people on.’ They expect you to be reflexively, invectively anti-Trump, and that’s problematic.”

With this single retort, it became abundantly clear that Conway is very aware that CNN’s viewers do not understand why she is included in national broadcasts and that her presence places the network in direct opposition of their core audience.

Nevertheless, it is that good old ethics thing that CNN remains loyal to, demonstrating to their viewers that they may not approve of Conway’s tactics or what she represents, but they will always be an institution that stands for open dialogue and discussion from varied perspectives.

Of course, some will say that bringing on Conway is simply a shield that large “liberal” networks use to protect themselves from criticisms and accusations of bias toward one side of the aisle.

It’s just like Lourdes Duarte said: “It’s my job to lay out the facts and the information.” That job includes finding sources and interviewing guests that speak in a way that may run circles around the reporter. More importantly, it is being prepared enough to push back on creative language and prepared to fight hard for the answers that must be revealed.

-30-

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *