During a debate about how important it was to listen to the views of average Trump voters on CNN’s Reliable Sources Sunday, political commentator Jeff Greenfield noted that the outlet hyped the Russia investigation to the point where it seemed as though the President would be indicted at any second. This, as political commentator Neera Tanden of the Center for American Progress and former Hillary Clinton policy director, claimed that the media didn’t listen to the anti-Trump resistance enough.
Towards the end of their discussion, Greenfield was commenting on how many people listen to certain media outlets because it catered to what they wanted to hear. “And I was told it's like sinking into a nice warm bath. And I think on both sides of the divide, people are sinking into nice warm baths to reconfirm what they believe,” he explained.
He then suggested that CNN was one of those kinds of places where the anti-Trump could find some solace:
The idea that when I watch CNN sometimes, I think, I expect the indictment on Donald Trump to be imminent because the focus on Russian collusion and that issue is very strong. And if you turn on MSNBC, you're going to get pretty much a nightly dose of the prosecutor's case against Donald Trump.
Meanwhile, as Greenfield was admitting that CNN and other outlets cater to the anti-Trump crowd, Tanden was whining about how the liberal media wasn’t doing more to amplify the voices of liberals. “The majority in this country oppose Trump. It seems to me The New York Times or other sources could at least have equal expression for those voices,” she bemoaned.
Greenfield appeared shocked by Tanden’s ignorance of how The New York Times operated. “Well, if you are a regular reader of The New York Times, for the last two and a half years you have gotten a full dose of view that Donald Trump is hellaciously unfit to be president,” he stated. Greenfield made it obvious that he wasn’t a fan of Trump but noted that he recently wrote a piece sharing the views of those who supported the President.
Yet Tanden wouldn’t stop complaining about the “resistance” not getting covered enough:
I think the issue is: Does the mainstream media want to cover both of these voices, the people marching on the streets as well as the people who still support Donald Trump. I think both of those are reasonable. But when you have a variety of outlets that continue to go to the voices of one side, I think people -- liberals are legitimately asking questions about that.
It’s hilarious that Tanden could still claim that the media wasn’t supportive of anti-Trump forces when part of the conversation was about how it was a special event for The New York to have writers supporting Trump. And add to that Greenfield admitting that CNN was hyping a Trump indictment long before the conclusion of the special counsel probe.
The relevant portions of the transcript are below:
CNN
Reliable Sources
January 21, 2018
11:27:49 AM EasternBRIAN STELTER: “Are Trump supporters still supporting Trump?” This has been a frequent feature of news coverage for the past year. Focus groups, interview, panels, stories all about why Trump voters are still with him. And some liberals hate it. They hate it! They say reporters are wasting time talking to Trump supporters. That those voters are practically in a cult. That they’ve signed up with a race and never going to change. That's what liberal critics say. On the other side, there's concern these features sometimes treat voters like an exotic species. Like Trump supporters are like animals in a zoo.
(…)
STELTER: That's why The New York Times decision to devote Thursday's editorial page to letters from Trump supporters was such a big talker. There were all of these letters all across the page. It was a decision by the Times to want to hear those voices, and what did I see on social media? I saw a lot of people saying, “I don't want to hear it. I'm canceling my subscription. I can't take it anymore.” I think it’s worth talking about in more detail because it's been something that's come up, again and again, all year long.
(…)
NEERA TANDAN: I actually think it's fine to hear from Trump voters. I think the challenge is that we don't hear enough of the resistance. (…) The majority in this country oppose Trump. It seems to me The New York Times or other sources could at least have equal expression for those voices.
STELTER: Jeff, what do you think?
JEFF GREENFIELD: Well, if you are a regular reader of The New York Times, for the last two and a half years you have gotten a full dose of view that Donald Trump is hellaciously unfit to be president. Just today, if you pick up the Times there is an editorial basically calling him out in harsh terms and at least four op-ed pieces in varying degrees saying that Trump is utterly unfit to be president. And I thought it was useful, for one day, for The New York Times to present views of people who say, “You know what? We know he has problems. But here's why we're for him.”
I always thought that one of the terrible mistakes of 2016 from the point of view of the Democrats was to kind of assume, and I think a lot in the press did too, that Trump so violated everything we thought about norms of the candidate that there was no chance he would be elected. And if you’re going to be serious about looking at the political terrain, it's important to know that there are people not imbued with nativist or racial grievance issues who see in Donald Trump a guy who's delivering for them. I just did a piece yesterday for PBS only talking with conservatives. Some of whom who have come to terms with Trump and say, “You know, he’s okay.” And some of whom are absolutely unremittingly against him on grounds of character. This is the kind of dialogue that I think we need.
(…)
TANDAN: I appreciate The New York Times editorial page is doing this, but it also needs-- other outlets need to do other voices as well.
(…)
TANDAN: I think the issue is: Does the mainstream media want to cover both of these voices, the people marching on the streets as well as the people who still support Donald Trump. I think both of those are reasonable. But when you have a variety of outlets that continue to go to the voices of one side, I think people -- liberals are legitimately asking questions about that.
STELTER: Jeff?
GREENFIELD: Well, I remember talking years ago to a United States senator who would go home and watch Keith Olbermann when he was on MSNBC beating up Bush. I said: “Why do you do that?!” And I was told it's like sinking into a nice warm bath. And I think on both sides of the divide, people are sinking into nice warm baths to reconfirm what they believe. The idea that when I watch CNN sometimes, I think, I expect the indictment on Donald Trump to be imminent because the focus on Russian collusion and that issue is very strong. And if you turn on MSNBC, you're going to get pretty much a nightly dose of the prosecutor's case against Donald Trump.
(…)
