Student on MySpace: CNN Forced Soft Question to Clinton

Authored by Scott Goldberg on November 16, 2007 - 10:35am.
Senator ClintonOf central issue prior to last night’s Democratic debate in Las Vegas was CNN host Wolf Blitzer’s approach to Clinton, which her campaigned had feared would be overly aggressive.  But afterward, the campaign praised Blitzer: The Drudge Report quoted a senior adviser to Clinton as saying, “(Blitzer) was outstanding, and did not gang up like (Tim) Russert did in Philadelphia. He avoided the personal attacks, remained professional and ran the best debate so far. Voters were the big winners last night.” Now Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic reports that at least one UNLV student, Maria Luisa, says CNN forced her to ask Clinton a question about whether she prefers “diamonds or pearls,” as opposed to the more challenging one she had originally created. 


Luisa wrote on her MySpace page, "Every single question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN.  I was asked to submit questions including ‘lighthearted/fun’ questions. I submitted more than five questions on issues important to me. I did a policy memo on Yucca Mountain a year ago and was the finalist for the Truman Scholarship. For sure, I thought I would get to ask the Yucca question that was APPROVED by CNN days in advance."


So where did the “diamonds vs. pearls” question come from?  Luisa writes: "CNN ran out of time and used me to ‘close’ the debate with the pearls/diamonds question. Seconds later this girl comes up to me and says, ‘you gave our school a bad reputation.' Well, I had to explain to her that every question from the audience was pre-planned and censored. That's what the media does. See, the media chose what they wanted, not what the people or audience really wanted. That's politics; that's reality. So, if you want to read about real issues important to America--and the whole world, I suggest you pick up a copy of the Economist or the New York Times or some other independent source. If you want me to explain to you how the media works, I am more than happy to do so. But do not judge me or my integrity based on that question."


The Huffington Post
reported today that, The audience hooted and jeered at both Edwards and Obama as attacks continued -- when Obama accused Clinton of sounding like Republican candidate Mitt Romney and when Edwards repeated charges the front-runner took money from special interests.” Ticket distribution for the debate was handled by UNLV.


As to the question Maria Luisa wanted to ask, she posted it on her blog: “Yucca Mountain, NV is the proposed site for the country's nuclear waste repository. Despite scientific evidence that it is a vulnerable site, the federal government continues to push for the plan to move forward. The evidence relied on is unsound and the risks involved in transporting high-level radioactive waste across the country are high. What will you [Sen. Clinton] do to ensure that the best site/s is/are chosen for the storage of spent nuclear reactor fuel?”


Fox News
reported last week that the Clinton campaign had confirmed they planted a question at a town hall meeting at Grinnell University, and the campaign said it would not happen again.  What happened in Las Vegas appears to lie strictly on the shoulders of CNN, for now.  But after the pressure the Clinton campaign put on Blitzer prior to the debate, news of a compromised question raises more questions.

Photo by SEIU International



Comments

Biased Reporting!

I must say that I have lost confidence in the reporting of CNN! CNN has proved and continues to prove unwarranted bias and favoritism in reporting on the Democratic Presidential candidates. When it comes to Mrs. Clinton, CNN does not report extensively on her negatives. For example, CNN is not extensively reporting on Mrs. Clinton's refusal to make her documents available for public scrutiny. Another example has to do with her vote on Iran. The kind of in-depth analyses that CNN provides on other candidates are not provided in this case. The vote on Iran was a critically important vote that entails prudence and judicious judgment. For Mrs. Clinton to have voted shows how shallow her judgment is as a leader. It does not bespeak the leadership qualities of a president that the American people need at this critical juncture. In all fairness, CNN should have done justice to the American people by extensively reporting on this vote. This was not the case. It was quite unfortunate. Wake up CNN and be objective. Another example has to do with the latest report that agents of Clinton are spreading rumors in Democratic circles that Mrs. Clinton has scandalous information on her principal rival. The public is not hearing any of this from CNN. Why? Doesn't CNN think that the public needs to know the fact. I also read Obama's reaction to this story. CNN is yet to carry the Senator's reaction. I wonder why the delay. CNN, please be objective and balanced in your coverage. This is your challenge.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Add image
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br><p> <b> <i> <img> <hr>
  • Images can be added to this post.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.