Trope Trounced: Van Jones Foolishly Plays the ‘Unelected Billionaire’ Card on Scott Jennin...
Life in Prison? Biden Reportedly Mulling Erasing Death Sentences for Several Inmates
Depressed Mode: Fashion-Forward or Step Backward? Reactions to Ella Emhoff’s Prada Pics
Mike Johnson Criticized As the CR Heads to the Senate: Brit Hume Asks,...
White House Cover-Up: Scott Jennings Asks Will Dems Who Lied for Biden Be...
The Third Spending Bill Passed the House Avoiding a Government Shutdown
Jacqui Heinrich Explains Why KJP Did Not Get 1 Q About WSJ's Report...
The Official 'Democrats' Account Tried to Own Trump, but Twitter Absolutely Dragged Them
Music Industry Tools, Rage Against The Machine Discovers The Joy of Selling Out...
Democrat Caught Lying about Residency Flips Minnesota House Back to GOP
'The Vehicles Are at It Again!' Driver Plowed Through a Christmas Market and...
Shocker: The 'Impossible' Thing Dems Said Would Never Happen, Totally Happened Again
Here's a Flashback to Just 1 Reason Nicolle Wallace Is a 'Media Propagandist...
Joe Biden’s Potential Incompetence Threatens Chaos in Our System (And We Should Embrace...
VIP Membership Christmas SALE: 60% Off!

MSNBC Political Analyst Urges Moderaters Not to Try to Be Balanced

Journalism meme

There was a trend that started shortly after President Donald Trump's inauguration. Outlets including the Washington Post started publishing opinion pieces about how unfettered free speech might not be that great of an idea. The press was actually writing in favor of censoring themselves.

Advertisement

That led to a debate over "both-sidesism." Are impartial journalists really supposed to present both sides of an issue? What if one side, say Trump and the Republicans, were lying or spreading disinformation? What if one side, usually the Democrats, is clearly right? Is the press obligated to give equal time to the lie?

Back in 2021, Matthew Dowd, who considers himself a proud independent, challenged his media colleagues to stop treating Republicans like they’re anything other than “insane.” "You don't talk to crazy people," he explained.

There's a debate tonight on ABC. Republicans haven't always had the best luck with debate moderators, like Candy Crowley and John Harwood. Trump's debate with President Joe Biden was moderated by CNN's Dana Loesch and Jake Tapper, both of who'd done segments on how Trump's rhetoric was more and more like that of Adolf Hitler. (To be fair, this editor thought Tapper conducted himself pretty well.)

Former Obama administration lackey, TIME Magazine editor, and CNN political analyst Richard Stengel has a problem with balance: he's afraid that tonight's debate moderators, ABC News' David Muir and Linsey Davis, might feel obligated to offer some balance to the proceedings.

Advertisement

Got that, moderators? Your job tonight is to protect democracy.

"… re: Covid and Joe Biden’s cognitive health. We are also aware of how those 'facts' played out. Their recent record as arbiters of truth, frankly, stinks."

Biden's a pathological liar. To this day he and what was his campaign promote the hoaxes that Trump told Americans to inject bleach and said that neo-Nazis were "very fine people." And the press never calls him out on it.

Advertisement

If the cable news networks want (and they probably will), they can "fact-check" the candidates after the debate is over — the moderators are there to ask questions.

Does he seriously believe the moderators don't have a horse in this race? The Media Research Center recently gave ABC News a 100% positive spin rating on coverage of Harris, and a 93 percent negative score for Trump.

Advertisement

Liberal Dan Rather is the godfather of fake news, creating the idea of "fake but accurate" in a hit piece on George W. Bush.

That's why the opponent is given time to respond. Let the moderators ask the questions and keep time. "Fact-check" all you want afterward.

***

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement