• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CBS executives ‘admit heated Ta-Nehisi Coates interview on Gaza did not meet standards’ after backlash

eman623

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 25, 2018
Messages
18,019
Reaction score
8,763
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm reminded of the file Borat where the eponymous titular character said he was worried his film would not get past Kazakhi censors due to anti-Jewish bias, but it turned out there was enough of it in the movie to be acceptable.

The title of this thread should be, "CBS accidentally does journalism, news room explodes in anger".

Author and professional piece of shit Ta-Nehisi Coates went on NBC to push his latest work of racist garbage, but had the misfortune to run into a journalist who recently converted to Judaism and has an ex-wife and kids who live in Israel. He wondered, not surprisingly, why if you took Coates words and dropped them in anti-semitic literature you might find it in the backpack of an extremist. Coates, blindsided with having to answer actual questions instead of doing softball practice, answered as best he could, meaning he ignored the question and answered a different one.

But that's not the story. The story is how CBS melted down over the completely civilized and definitely not "heated" accidental journalism and the tearful meetings and recriminations that followed.

MSN

www.msn.com
 
I saw the interview, and it changed from being journalistic questions about the topic to one of a person pushing a particular view point. I don't think it deserved backlash, but Dokoupil's questioned assumed more of the book than its intention, and of course even in the framing of his question, he leaves out what led to the Intifadas.
 
ElChupacabra said:
I saw the interview, and it changed from being journalistic questions about the topic to one of a person pushing a particular view point.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's true, but CBS is famous or is it infamous for pushing a particular view point. Margaret Brennan certainly seemed to push a particular view point during the VP debate.

ElChupacabra said:
I don't think it deserved backlash, but Dokoupil's questioned assumed more of the book than its intention, and of course even in the framing of his question, he leaves out what led to the Intifadas.
Click to expand...
Ideological conformity in newsrooms cannot be allowed to be anything but absolute.
 
eman623 said:
I'm reminded of the file Borat where the eponymous titular character said he was worried his film would not get past Kazakhi censors due to anti-Jewish bias, but it turned out there was enough of it in the movie to be acceptable.
Click to expand...

eman623 said:
The title of this thread should be, "CBS accidentally does journalism, news room explodes in anger".
Click to expand...
LOL. Yeah.

eman623 said:
Author and professional piece of shit Ta-Nehisi Coates went on NBC to push his latest work of racist garbage,
Click to expand...
All this guy pushes.

 
eman623 said:
I don't think that's true, but CBS is famous or is it infamous for pushing a particular view point. Margaret Brennan certainly seemed to push a particular view point during the VP debate.
Click to expand...
What viewpoint is that?

eman623 said:
Ideological conformity in newsrooms cannot be allowed to be anything but absolute.
Click to expand...
Except the backlash wasn't about ideological conformity. The backlash was against what was clear a journalist (Dokoupil) trying to make the book out to be a the larger Israel/Palestinian conflict when that wasn't the author's intention, and what Dokoupil suggested with his questions is there book should have been pushing the Israeli narrative.
 
ElChupacabra said:
What viewpoint is that?
Click to expand...
One where every question comes from the leftist POV and that lets the left say anything unchallenged while the other side gets fact checked. Brennen probably even thinks she was being fair and impartial.

Tony Dokoupil took exception to that one chapter. He said so specifically. And he did not suggest the book should be "pushing the Israeli narrative." He said it should be more balanced and that it only pushed the Palestinian narrative and the language "reads like the work of an extremist."
 
eman623 said:
One where every question comes from the leftist POV and that lets the left say anything unchallenged while the other side gets fact checked. Brennen probably even thinks she was being fair and impartial.
Click to expand...
So this must be a problem for you on right leaning media as well, yes? It's the larger problem of news media relying on ratings for revenue, since they are beholden to the demands of their audience demographics.

Well, considering Coates' book was exactly to present his experience in Palestine from that perspective of those who he spent time with and what he saw. Not everything has to present two sides, because an author may choose to dive into one side of the issue.
 
ElChupacabra said:
So this must be a problem for you on right leaning media as well, yes? It's the larger problem of news media relying on ratings for revenue, since they are beholden to the demands of their audience demographics.
Click to expand...
I don't see Kamala volunteering to debate Trump on Fox.

In fact, there probably won't be any more debates unless truly neutral forums and moderators can be found. If I were running for president, I wouldn't walk into a 3-on-1 like that. **** CBS and **** ABC!

Oh please! Imagine Ben Shapiro writes a book and goes on CBS to talk about it. They would be all over him, angrily cherry picking it for stuff to challenge him on.

Coates should only go on friendly venues where he won't be challenged on anything. Actually he thought he was. As I noted in the OP, that's why this is a story. Not that he was challenged, but challenged on CBS and the resulting meltdown from the CBS newsroom who think the role of journalism is to push a particular POV.
 
eman623 said:
Coates should only go on friendly venues where he won't be challenged on anything.
Click to expand...

MSNBC. They love race-baiting. Especially Joy Reid. Although i don't know if Al Sharpton would have him on. Does Al like anyone else trying to bogart the Race Baiting market?
 
eman623 said:
I don't see Kamala volunteering to debate Trump on Fox.
Click to expand...
I'm actually disappointed she didn't go, because what doesn't change is Trump is an easily wound up person, so I don't think he would be stronger on Fox. What there would have more likely been is more persistent questions from the moderators on Harris, since we know Trump didn't want her on Fox because it's "neutral ground"

eman623 said:
In fact, there probably won't be any more debates unless truly neutral forums and moderators can be found. If I were running for president, I wouldn't walk into a 3-on-1 like that. **** CBS and **** ABC!
Click to expand...
The interesting thing about all the whinging around moderators is that's not what made Trump look bad, especially in the last debate. No one looks back on that debate as the one where the moderator tripped Trump up with endless probing, it was his own undoing. Has the subject of endless ridicule for Trump been an answer to a moderator question? Nope. It was the time he took to address the obvious bait from Harris.

eman623 said:
Oh please! Imagine Ben Shapiro writes a book and goes on CBS to talk about it. They would be all over him, angrily cherry picking it for stuff to challenge him on.
Click to expand...
I suspect a lot of that would depend on what he writes about, but to the point I made earlier, news media presents the news skewed to their demographics. That is the financial incentive these networks are responding to.

Which is where Dokoupil was heading, and also was critiquing the book rather than asking questions about how the author arrived at his conclusions.
 

-The New York Times publishes a guest essay with X-rays which is now being heavily disputed by several ballistics experts and radiologists. It refuses an internal investigation.

- The New York Times brushes aside clear examples of plagiarism by Kamala Harris, instead turning their focus on the people who discovered it and calling them racist.

And the media all wants you to care about misinformation on social media instead.
 
I heard Coates discussing his book on Trevor Noah's podcast. It was a very interesting discussion.
 

"...why if you took Coates words and dropped them in anti-semitic literature you might find it in the backpack of an extremist..."

For instance?
 

I gather you don't figure the Coates outrage is enough to stand on its own.
 
"The problem with Dokoupil’s questions was not that they were tough. They were textbook, really. Even the mildest critics of Israel’s government are often asked whether Israel should exist. Coates responded to that question, appropriately, by saying he was skeptical of any nation that made ethnicity its highest principle.

No, the really tough questions were those posed by Coates, who asked why there are no Palestinian voices in the upper ranks of the American news media; who asked why he recognized a superstructure similar to Jim Crow in Israel’s treatment of Palestinians; who asked why we should accept policies subjugating people based on race and ethnicity anywhere in the world.
To these questions, Dokoupil and his co-anchors had no answers. So, who was really asking the tough questions?

Dokoupil’s “backpack of an extremist” jab at Coates was the most troubling. When the idea of humanizing Palestinians is recast as a form of extremism, or as a threat to Western civilization, we are in dangerous territory. Dokoupil’s implicit message is that merely questioning the condition of Palestinians might be a rationale for censure — or much worse.

Which is a reminder that there has long been an attempt by the supposedly impartial or knowledgeable to put second-class peoples into a special box of “problems” or “questions” that defy easy answers:

Link
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…