Hammering Tim Rutten

LA Times columnist Tim Rutten hammered CNN for its "corrupt" performance in the YouTube debate.  His gist - CNN emphasized immigration becasue it is a big issue for CNN's Lou Dobbs, not because anyone cares:

CNN chose to devote the first 35 minutes of this critical debate to a single issue -- immigration. Now, if that leaves you scratching your head, it's probably because you're included in the 96% of Americans who do not think immigration is the most important issue confronting this country. We've got a pretty good fix concerning what's on the American mind right now, because the nonpartisan and highly reliable Pew Center has been regularly polling people since January on the issues that matter most to them. In fact, the center's most recent survey was conducted in the days leading up to Wednesday's debate.

HERE'S what Pew found: By an overwhelming margin, Americans think the war in Iraq is the most important issue facing the United States, followed by the economy, healthcare and energy prices. In fact, if you lump the war into a category with terrorism and other foreign policy issues, 40% of Americans say foreign affairs are their biggest concern in this election cycle. If you do something similar with all issues related to the economy, 31% list those questions as their most worrisome issue. As anybody who has looked at their 401(k) or visited a gas pump would expect, that aggregate figure has increased dramatically since Pew started polling in January. Back then, for example, concerns over the war outpaced economic anxieties by fully 8 to 1. By contrast, just 6% of the survey's national sample said that immigration was the most important electoral issue. Moreover, that number hasn't changed in a statistically meaningful way since the first of the year. In other words, more than nine out of 10 Americans think something matters more than immigration in this presidential election.

Captain Ed points out that "has been a big issue for the Republicans the last three years".

And Micky Kaus delivers the lash:

But of course this was a Republican primary debate, and presumably focused on issues of concern to Republican primary voters. Why didn't Rutten give his readers some Pew findings for Republicans, as opposed to all Americans? Could it be because they would show that immigration is indeed a big issue for these voters?

And Mickey links to this Pew post-debate commentary:

The first four questions of the night all focused on illegal immigration. In this regard, Pew polling shows that the debate was reflective of the importance of immigration as an issue in the Republican presidential primary.

Ouch. 

Comments

[kim]

Immigration hasn't even been demagogued yet. Give it time.
==================================

[clarice]

He shoulda picked a better example..or been honest, promoting Dobbs was not the motivation for this fiasco.It was to portray the Reps badly--from goofy gun nots, to bible thumpers to racists.

[kim]

I love it; Gun Nuts Vs Gun Nots.
====================

[pagar]

If illegal immigration isn't part of foreign policy, what is? It appears our foreign policy is to let anyone who can walk into the US stay.

[kim]

Make no mistake, immigration is the big wave next year unless there are tremors in Bali. Expect the economy, the war, and healthcare to be relative nonissues next year. The only fervor going in the Democrats favor is the generalized anger about immigration; global warming may be the secret sauce, and we are probably cooling, folks.
====================================

[kim]

Not that Democrats won't try to make the war, the economy, and your health big issues; the Diebold Machines just won't register it.
======================================

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Immigration is a bigger issue than gays in the military, wonder why he didn't hammer CNN over General Kerr's question-oration?

[sbw]

Re: CJR's defense of CNN's debate

Television news and newspapers aren't irrelevant in the Internet age. What is irrelevant is the writing J-school graduates pass off as journalism. The reputation of the press will heal once we pass this kidney stone of some forty years of instructors and the students they have warped.

Columbia">http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/cnn_neednt_apologize.php">Columbia Journalism Review illustrates the point with a string of words that compulsively puts down legitimate criticism of CNN's bogus debate questions without daring to address what was wrong. Not looking at things is not the best way to look at things. Whatever the discomfort, CJR needs to face that CNN blew it.

Of course debates need the best questions, but biologists shouldn't suggest their best questions for a chemistry test. Debate questions were to address concerns of undecided Republicans. One does not search for such questions among rabid Democrats, fixed in their convictions and bent on winning at all costs.

It is not news to belabor the obvious, but that's what CJR did. The quality of the questions, upon which the CJR column dwelt, was never an issue. Instead, although calculated to show how sharp it was, CJR's column exposed only its own condescension. CJR ends up a flip pseudo-educated Rosencrantz or Guildenstern playing its game of life oblivious to the realities underneath, until reality bites the player in the ass.

CJR isn't high on my reading list because they represent a Dark Age of journalism. They risk being remembered, if at all, for shallow conceit instead of a backbone of humility and enlightenment. But don't expect them to notice.

[Cecil Turner]

I dug through the selected clips, looking for a pattern. Here's how it looks to me:

Chris Nandor (singing) Okay, this guy is a Republican.
Ernie Nardi is an immigration nut . . . probably GOP variant.
Michael Weitz GOP.
Jack Brooks Uses a handle that leads to this website (that lists pro-bono work done for Brooks). Nuckols would appear to be an Edwards supporter, but this is pretty thin.

Ashley no information
"Seekster" from Arlington, Texas might be a Fred plant. Hard to see a motive going after Paul, though.
Sarah Lederach is an 18 year-old student. Affiliation unknown.
Emily from Los Angeles is probably an actual Republican (libertarian variant).
Ronald Lanham appears to be an actual Republican (libertarian variant).
Grover Norquist is a nut, but arguably a GOP nut.
Ted Faturos is a Democrat. Former Jane Harmon intern.
LeeAnn Anderson Democrat. Edwards supporter.
Jay Fox is a tongue-in-cheek gun nut.
Andrew Fink Appears to be a Ron Paul supporting Nut. But at least that makes him a Republican, right?
Eric Bentson is a gun nut.
Prentiss Tate is apparently an Obama supporter.
Journey from Texas Democrat. Edwards supporter.
AJ from Millstone, New Jersey is a cipher.
Tyler Overman is neither a Christian, nor a Republican.
Joseph Dearing 9/11 conspiracist ("truther"). Possibly unaffiliated and Bible thumper. Nut.
Yasmin from Huntsville is a former CAIR intern.
Andrew Jones Appears to be Republican. (Even if his pet peeve is a lib Dem talking point.)
Buzz Brockway Token Republican.
Sam Garcia (no info . . . from question, anti-rudy)
Nick Anderson Democrat. (Editorial cartoonist--even CNN didn't mean to take seriously.)
Brigadier Gen. Keith Kerr (Ret.) Democrat. Hillary supporter (campaign staffer, even).
David Cercone Democrat. Obama supporter.
Adam Florzak Nut, SS Activist with ties to Dick Durbin's staff.
Steve Nielson Actual Republican.
David McMillan Democrat. Edwards supporter.
Leroy Brooks An idiot who admits the question was a stupid trick:

this was actually one of my mor eunimportant issues. THe real intintion of this was to get a major candidate to attack me or blow me off and therefore hurting their southern base

Dr. Hank Campbell Dunno. Apparently asks Dems questions as well, though.
Mark Strauss is a CNN plant, and Democrat.

Chris Krul, NBC cameraman, appears to've been looking for a hit on Rudy. I suspect he ain't GOP.

So what's that mean? Rutten got at least this part right:

When producers exercise that level of selectivity, the questions -- whoever initially formulated and recorded them -- actually are theirs.

And the questions they selected, predominantly unserious and leaning toward nuts and plants, indicate to me a concerted effort to demean the process. As if it needed it.

[kim]

I remember reading Corey Pein's CJR article about the Rather fiasco sitting on the floor of the local Borders. I felt a chill as, knowing what I knew then, the leaves of the paper rustled like giant cockroach wings.
===============================