The sexual harassment allegations against Herman Cain have been case of trial by media. Many in the media have chosen to label him guilty until proven innocent, despite the American principle to do exactly the opposite.
Yesterday, Daily Caller senior contributor Matt Lewis was on CNN's "Reliable Sources" to discuss the presumption of guilt or innocence, and guest Lauren Ashburn (and, to some extent, host Howard Kurtz) both erred on the side of presuming guilt in the case of Herman Cain.
Do you think the media have already found Cain guilty? Check out the video after the break, and let us know your thoughts in the comments.
Lewis explained, "Ultimately, the problem for the media is there is no stained blue dress. We do know that a decade ago, these two accusations were made, that settlements were made, but that's all we know. We don't have any proof or evidence...If someone is accused they're innocent until proven guilty, and you are assuming that Cain is guilty. I'm assuming that I don't know who's guilty."
As previously noted at NewsBusters, the media have hyped the allegations against Cain, while they ignored those against former President Bill Clinton. What do you think of the allegations against Cain and the media's treatment of them?
