NYT: "Clinton Friend’s Role Sets Off Intense Criticism of CNN and a Re-examination"

CNN must have gotten flooded with furious emails from the netroots. Yes!

'Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton prepared for a battle with her Democratic rivals at the CNN-sponsored debate on Thursday night.
She did not have much to fear from the postdebate round table... Mr. Carville’s presence aroused the fury of rivals and bloggers.
They called it a conflict of interest and criticized CNN.

“Would it kill CNN to disclose that James Carville is a partisan Clinton supporter when talking about the presidential race?” Markos
Moulitsas wrote on his liberal blog, Daily Kos. Mr. Moulitsas drew hundreds of comments.

Tom Reynolds, a spokesman for Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who is also seeking the Democratic nomination, said: “What you
saw last night lacked full disclosure. The average viewer out in middle America may not know the inside-the-Beltway connection.”

The criticisms were among a series against CNN for how it managed the debate, a two-hour event in Las Vegas...Voters and
commentators wrote online about how the audience cheered and booed, the way the CNN hosts reframed audience questions
and whether it was correct to demand yes-or-no answers to complex questions...'

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/17/us/politics/17cnn.html

:toast:

But anyone who doesn't think "Clinton" when someone sees Carville...well, that's like seeing Fred Astaire and not thinking Ginger Rogers. Same deal with Paul Begala.

I suppose there are people out there who don't know, but they'd have to be quite young..... or very much off in the ozone during the Clinton years.

The more disclosure the merrier, I suppose!

He's not a political junkie and he's always on the go with his business interests. And you're right -- transparency in media
(and government) is good!

Carvell is a fixture in the MSM.

of the White House

And NPR has hosted too--but don't look at THEM as the Be All and End All--they're infested with GOP stooges these days. It's why their programming fucking sucks.

The networks are taking turns, and that's fine. Gives their news divisions something to do. It is also an interesting "compare and contrast" exercise in how each network handles the process.

The 'offense' took place in the pre and post debate chit-chat. I don't waste my time with that crap, I don't need some big fat talking head to tell me what I am going to see or what I just saw.

I'd gather, that since CNN got their ass handed to them, they won't pull that crap again if they do any more hosting. There's nothing wrong with having partisans on--in fact, they can add details that others don't know--but the old 'full disclosure' is what people have a problem with.

The CNN debate evened the deck...

That being said, the shenanigans should never, never have been started...

People simply have to use their own good judgment, and if some bastard wearing makeup and hairspray under very bright lights tries to tell you what to think, turn down the volume!

was the most entertaining of the two. I do not appreciate tearing at one another like that. However as this race is shaping up. it would appear to be a poker game. (winner take all of course.) and a sound strategy is to let the chip leaders go after each other. the raucousness of the Nevada crowd fueled a greater debate I think. Pa was too straight laced, numbing in comparison.

Mark Penn takes a page out of the Republican handbook again. F*ck the Clintons!

DSB

I did and CNN clearly stated that Carvelle was a past adviser of President Clinton.

(PS up until recently I could not stand Hillary - however the more I read about her and they way some people are attacking her Im starting to change my mind.)

I was waiting for Gergen to disclose that he used to work under the Clintons, too.

Nothing.