On Sunday, desperate to deflect media criticism of President Biden’s catastrophic Afghanistan failures, CNN’s Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter suggested other topics like climate change really needed to take priority in the press. His panel of liberal pundits predictably agreed and argued that coverage of the foreign policy debacle was overblown.
“Now let’s evaluate coverage, especially American coverage, of the withdrawal from Afghanistan....a lot of it’s covered through a political lens,” Stelter warned at the top of the segment. Rather than credit journalists for actually doing their jobs and holding the Biden administration accountable, the hack anchor instead made it clear that his agenda was to undermine those efforts: “I want to ask several guests if the media has been missing the mark in coverage of the withdrawal and in the events in Afghanistan. Is the story being too simplified?”
Turning to The Atlantic’s James Fallows, Stelter invited scolding of reporters covering the disastrous withdrawal: “What has gone wrong in the coverage in the last two weeks in your view?” Fallows whined about comparisons being made to the end of the Vietnam war:
I think here there’s been a gross failure by the U.S. media, by the instant equation of the fall of Kabul with the fall of Saigon, which it has almost nothing in similar – that is similar except for the pictures of helicopters....I think the keeping things in perspective is where the media have fallen shortest on the U.S. side.
Stelter concluded: “So, the comparisons between Kabul and Saigon, which we heard a lot two weeks ago, you’re saying those were – those are beside the point.” Fallows added: “It flattens the reality of what happened in the Vietnam war to say that what’s happening in Kabul now, tragic as it is, is similar to that.”
Minutes later, Stelter offered up a list of other topics that he thought the media should be covering besides Afghanistan: “There are multiple major events happening this month. The COVID crisis among the unvaccinated in America. Climate change. I mean, my God, this hurricane is a monster.” He then wondered: “What do you say about proportionality and about how much Afghanistan should be the front page story versus COVID or climate change or other stories?”
Fallows concurred and drew on his experience working for another incompetent Democratic president:
So, I think that a challenge for us in the media is to try to keep multiple things in view. The hardest thing about being president – I say having worked in the White House decades ago for Jimmy Carter – is that the president is having to deal with emergencies on all fronts all the time.
And I think for those of us in the media and the citizenry right now, it’s kind of a sample of what governments need to do, thinking about climate change day-by-day, thinking about Afghanistan, thinking about COVID, which is still an emergency, thinking about this hurricane. So if we in our roles in print and broadcast and other ways can try to present people – there’s a famous line adopted from Matthew Arnold, “See things steady and see them whole.” We can’t always do that because essentially what’s on TV commands attention right now. But having that in the back of our mind, that this is what our governments are dealing with and our citizens should be aware of these multiple challenges too, all the time.
One would think a supposed media analyst like Stelter would cheer on journalists holding the President of the United States to account for multiple failures that cost lives. However, since Stelter is just a propagandist for the Democratic Party, he lectures the press for focusing too much on Afghanistan and asking too many tough questions.
This leftist media spin session was brought to viewers by Dove and Kayak. You can fight back by letting these advertisers know what you think of them sponsoring such content.
Here is a full transcript of the August 29 segment:
11:22 AM ET
BRIAN STELTER: Now let’s evaluate coverage, especially American coverage, of the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Many are, as The Arizona Republic put it, clutching onto hope. We continue to see evacuations from the country, although it has really slowed down in the past couple of days since the bombing at the airport.
This is a complicated, consequential international story. But a lot of it’s covered through a political lens. I want to ask several guests if the media has been missing the mark in coverage of the withdrawal and in the events in Afghanistan. Is the story being too simplified?
Let’s talk about with, let me bring back Azmat Khan. She’s back with me, along with James Fallows, journalist and contributing writer for The Atlantic. And Eric Boehlert, the founder and editor of PressRun Media.
So, let’s go around, talk about critics of the coverage thus far. James Fallows, first to you, you wrote a groundbreaking book decades ago, Breaking the News, where you critiqued the American media’s obsession with breaking news coverage. What has gone wrong in the coverage in the last two weeks in your view?
JAMES FALLOWS [CONTRIBUTING WRITER, THE ATLANTIC]: So, in the simplest terms, I think in moments like this, the media – the American media have three responsibilities. Number one is to tell the story and to humanize the story. And I think with some obvious, you know, exceptions, there’s been a lot of coverage of the news and people understand the drama of what’s happening on the ground.
The second thing that media need to be involved in is accountability of how these things happen – on the American side, the Afghan side, the civilian side, the military side. I hope there is more of that.
The third thing the media should be doing is keeping things in perspective. How this fits in historical terms. And I think here there’s been a gross failure by the U.S. media, by the instant equation of the fall of Kabul with the fall of Saigon, which it has almost nothing in similar – that is similar except for the pictures of helicopters. I can make the case later on, but I think the keeping things in perspective is where the media have fallen shortest on the U.S. side.
STELTER: So, the comparisons between Kabul and Saigon, which we heard a lot two weeks ago, you’re saying those were – those are beside the point.
FALLOWS: It flattens the reality of what happened in the Vietnam war to say that what’s happening in Kabul now, tragic as it is, is similar to that. There were 20 times as many Americans killed in Vietnam. There were – you know, there’s similar difference of scale in the casualties in Southeast Asia, that there are almost a million people who took to sea as boat people, 100,000 who drowned. It was different sort of thing.
STELTER: Azmat, you said to me off the air, this is not about the last two weeks. Most of the American media has been ignoring Afghanistan for years.
AZMAT KHAN [INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST]: It’s true. I think that as U.S. troops withdrew from the country in 2014, you also saw news organizations dedicate less attention to the country.
Now, there are some notable exceptions to that. There’s been a group of Afghan reporters at The New York Times who just have been on it in terms of tracking casualties. But we tend to see the most accountability reporting, the most investigations happen, when U.S. soldiers are dying.
So, even though the war was continuing at record pace, we were dropping more bombs at record pace in Afghanistan in 2019, media coverage was some of its lowest that year. And it has terrible effects. And what I mean by that is many Americans are watching what’s happening in Kabul right now as it’s unfolding and that is informing their decision about whether or not the U.S. should have withdrawn, rather than some of the events in the last few years. Including, for example, the fact that ISIS-K, which carried out the attack on Thursday has been staging similar attacks for years. And the United States has been dropping bombs on them, large ones, the mother of all bombs, in fact, a bomb that was more than 21,000 pounds, to no avail.
So, the question really is, what would be different? And are we getting the context to know that, to really have an informed debate about this war?
STELTER: Okay. Eric Boehlert, now you’re up. The liberal argument the last two weeks has been, the media is too pro-war, trying to argue for more intervention, trying to get back into Afghanistan. Then the bombing happened. Have you seen a change in recent days?
ERIC BOEHLERT [FOUNDER AND EDITOR, PRESSRUN MEDIA]: Yeah, I think – I think the bombing, there was less of a need for the press to inject drama, not that the story ever needed drama, but I think the press got kind of married to this storyline, very doomsday, you know, Biden teetering on collapse, the evacuation will never work. These are things that just did not pan out.
A week ago, the consensus – media consensus was we probably wouldn’t evacuate 20,000 or 30,000 people. You know, we’re up to 110,000, 120,000. You know, according to 538, you know, Biden’s approval rating is down 2.5 points in the last two weeks. This is among – during a drumbeat of relentlessly negative 24/7 Kabul coverage.
So, you know, the story – before the bombing, the story kind of pivoted but the press didn’t pivot. I think with that horrendous attack, we saw more straightforward news coverage rather than, you know, let’s inject drama into this.
And just a quick data point on the lack of coverage, you know, prior to this year – ABC, CBS, NBC evening news, 2020, five minutes of Afghan coverage for the entire calendar year.
STELTER: Now, about that, let’s go a little deeper on that, James.
BOEHLERT: Yup.
STELTER: There are multiple major events happening this month. The COVID crisis among the unvaccinated in America. Climate change. I mean, my God, this hurricane is a monster.
What do you say about proportionality and about how much Afghanistan should be the front page story versus COVID or climate change or other stories?
FALLOWS: So, I think that a challenge for us in the media is to try to keep multiple things in view. The hardest thing about being president – I say having worked in the White House decades ago for Jimmy Carter – is that the president is having to deal with emergencies on all fronts all the time.
And I think for those of us in the media and the citizenry right now, it’s kind of a sample of what governments need to do, thinking about climate change day-by-day, thinking about Afghanistan, thinking about COVID, which is still an emergency, thinking about this hurricane. So if we in our roles in print and broadcast and other ways can try to present people – there’s a famous line adopted from Matthew Arnold, “See things steady and see them whole.” We can’t always do that because essentially what’s on TV commands attention right now. But having that in the back of our mind, that this is what our governments are dealing with and our citizens should be aware of these multiple challenges too, all the time.
STELTER: James, Eric, and Azmat, thank you all for the conversation.
