CNN Highlights New CSPI Popcorn Study, Omits Its Left-Wing Affiliation

Change font size:  A |  A

Two CNN programs ran news briefs on a new study on movie popcorn from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, but omitted its left-wing affiliation. Anchor John Roberts mentioned the group by name on Wednesday’s CNN Tonight, but didn’t mention its liberal politics. His colleague Kiran Chetry didn’t even mention CSPI by name during her brief on the study on Thursday’s American Morning.

Roberts read his news brief on the CSPI study 12 minutes into the 7 pm Eastern hour: “[W]e all know how expensive popcorn and soda is at the movie theater, but you may not know the cost to your waistline. The Center for Science in the Public Interest tonight says it has the answer. The group analyzed how much fat and calories are in a medium sized popcorn from Regal, which is the country’s largest movie chain.” He continued that “an astonishing 1,160 calories and 60 grams of fat- that is three days worth. Add a soda to the mix, and the combination is equal to eating three McDonald’s quarter-pounders plus 12 pats of butter. The calorie and fat count was far more than claimed by the movie theater company.”

Almost 11 hours later, just minutes into the 6 am Eastern hour of American Morning, Kiran Chetry, who is Roberts’s co-anchor on the CNN morning program, gave further figures from the study, and didn’t even mention CSPI by name:

KIRAN CHETRY: Movie popcorn- a nutritional horror show. A new study reveals little has changed in the past decade. A medium popcorn from Regal Cinemas contains 20 cups, worth a whopping 1,200 calories, 60 grams of saturated fat and 980 milligrams of sodium, and that does not include the buttery topping, which adds another 200 calories and three grams of saturated fat per 1 1/2 tablespoons.

JOHN ROBERTS: And how much butter do you put on the popcorn? Five, six-

CHETRY: You just keep pumping.

ROBERTS: Just keep pumping.

Neither Roberts on Wednesday evening, nor Chetry on Thursday morning, mentioned the left-wing politics of the Center for Science for the Public Interest. They followed the lead of their colleague Wolf Blitzer, who read a brief about the organization’s “ten riskiest foods regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug and Administration” study over a month earlier on the October 6 edition of The Situation Room, but neglected to give it any ideological label. He merely described it as an “activist watchdog group.”