CNN's Hill Shilling

The Nevada Democrat Debate was even more of a travesty than I originally understood.

It turns out that CNN tried every tacky trick in the book in an effort to bolster their preferred candidate: Hillary.


Not only was the viewing public terribly ill-served, but CNN may have caused real harm to the nation's democratic process as a result of its naked manipulation.

Here are just a few of CNN's journalistic sins:

- stacking the audience in favor of one candidate
- Wolf turning deaf and dumb when it came to questioning Hillary
- serving up Democrat party operatives as "undecided voters" and allowing them to ask questions (including the infamous "Do you prefer diamonds or pearls?' question to Hillary
- pretending that Hillary campaign advisor James Carville was an unaffiliated pundit during the post-debate review (Of course, Carville thought Hillary won.)


Questions About Carville and CNN

CNN's and Carville's lack of ethics
Diamonds and Pearls and Girls for President
“Random” questioner at debate was Arkansas Democratic Party officer in 2003?

No comments:

Post a Comment