In defense of CNN

He spent 10 minutes on live TV claiming the Mandate was struck down.

setting.
It's OK - he's very manly and authoritative

OP rebutted and refuted. Finis.

would be overturned. They went on for 15 minutes as if it was overturned.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

Too many want to be the first even if they have to backtrack later.

Write the basics for each contingency to have it ready to go, then you write the final story with the details. I spent 20 years in broadcasting, I know how it operates.

I've written many a story from both sides as a placeholder over the years: first for broadcasting and then for the web.

What I would have done in this case is that around 8 AM this morning I would have written and printed out the following:

Breaking news: the Supreme Court has voted to strike down the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, handing a major defeat to the Obama Administration. The vote was ___ to ___, with Justice ______________ writing the decision.

Breaking news: the Supreme Court has voted to uphold the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, handing a major victory to the Obama Administration. The vote was ___ to ___, with Justice ______________ writing the decision.

Breaking news: the Supreme Court has voted to strike down portions of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, while leaving other aspects of the law intact.

Then when the announcement came down I would fill in the blanks for the votes and who wrote the decision and hand it over to the news guy on air. I'd then start writing a more in-depth story based on the actual decision which would go right on the air as soon as it was finished.

What probably happened is that some intern on hearing "mandate unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause" grabbed story "A" and handed it off to the desk. Then Wolf vamped for a while until the truth became apparent.

a negative headline out ASAP. CNN is Fox lite.

before airing it. There is no excuse for what happened at CNN. Their first and foremost duty as a news organization is supposed to be "get the story right" before airing story.

with a sensational story.

they were the only ones that got it wrong. And kept going on & on with the wrong info.

They have zillions of conservative dollars to run their Giant Liberal Media propaganda outlet.

But nice try, or something.

With this gross error, they simply mirror them yet again. I am glad they did this as it makes it even clearer, if possible, how little credibility they should be given.

corportate dollars at work for 1%!

Media Matters has shown that negative press from ALL the news networks for President Obama/Democrats far outweighs positive press. CNN needs to answer for this 'mistake', not be defended and especially NOT by Democrats...

"Liberal Media" Hasn't Given Obama A Week Of Positive Press Coverage In Nearly One Year



http://mediamatters.org/blog/201204240009

but this was probably a legitimate mistake.

There's no defense for that in journalism. This is a huge black eye for CNN, and I predict heads will roll (i.e., if anybody at CNN actually gives two shits about real journalism).

Bake

It was all over their live TV channel too.

when you read the syllabus of the decision, it goes through all the various holdings, summing them up in several pages. The first one says that Roberts held the mandate is not constitutional under the Commerce Clause. So someone saw that and jumped the gun. When you read on, though, a page or two later it says that Roberts says it IS constitutional as a tax. So it's a case of trying to get it first, but failing to get it right by reading the whole summary.