Judy Woodgruff leaving CNN - One less Whore in the stable?

[FrenchieCat]

But she will only be replaced by a younger and better looking hoe. Well, I don't care, I could not stand this woman.....and her biased unabashed ways! June cannot come soon enough for me!

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/tv/article.adp?id=20050428132209990022&
Anchor Judy Woodruff Leaving CNN in June
By DAVID BAUDER, AP

NEW YORK (April 28) - Judy Woodruff, the anchor of CNN's ''Inside Politics,'' is leaving the network when her contract expires in June.

Woodruff, 58, said Thursday that she hoped to teach, write and work on long-form documentaries. She'll also be a consultant and occasional contributor to CNN.

''This gives me the opportunity to sit back, take a deep breath and think about what I want to do,'' Woodruff told The Associated Press. ''I do want to stay in journalism. I'm not leaving journalism. I'm just leaving daily journalism.
More....

She needs to sit back, take a deep breath and look at what she's done, if you ask me.

She won't be teaching any class I will ever attend....unless it's Mediawhoring 101!

Bu-Bye MEDIA HOE! Let the door hit you on the way out....will ya?
http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/0b/03/20050428142309990001

[tishaLA]

1. Once upon a time, I swear

Woodruff wasn't as bad as she is now and I think I almost admired her journalism. It seems like a long time ago, but I really believe that is true. Or maybe I was hallucinating at the time.

I hope leaving "daily journalism" will help her gain some integrity.

[bunkerbuster1]

3. It wasn't that long ago.

She was fine as a Newshour host for PBS. I really liked her; I know it sounds goofy and gushy to say this, but I actually trusted her (and Jim Lehrer, who I still do respect.)

[FrenchieCat]

5. I realize that Judy wasn't always a Whore.....

But I watched closely throughout the primaries and the general election....and she learned pretty quickly how to do it.

Personally, I'm really happy to see her go and do something else. Again, they'll just replace her with someone just as bad, if not worst....but maybe it helps teach that whoring really doesn't pay in a long run.

Now, time to work on Wolf-ticket Blitzer. Can't stand him either!

[miss_kitty]

61. Jim Lehrer is no great shakes either

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1586

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2406

Just two of many journalistic no-nos tracked by FAIR. Don't believe the 'NPR=good', or 'balanced' hype anymore. They're resting on old laurels, trying to hold on to old listeners by not acknowledging the out and out pandering to the right they're engaged in to hang on to funding....

[goodhue]

4. frontline

I remember her as Frontline host in the late 80s. As you say, she seemed pretty good when on PBS. But her Inside Politics performance has been atrocious.

[coloradodem2005]

2. Goodbye and good riddance.

[newsguyatl]

6. she's trashed on du

and she's trashed on free republic.

she must have been doing SOMETHING right.

i admire and respect judy. and am sad to see her go.

[spooky3]

7. I always find that argument hard to swallow.

Dana Milbank (and many others) like to use it to tell themselves they are doing an unbiased job.

We know that the RWers will attack anyone who doesn't take an extremist point of view on every single thing they report on.

Therefore, when liberals object to someone's behavior, it simply counterbalances the RWers and must mean that the behavior is good?

Obviously, it doesn't.

Instead, we should look at the behavior itself and compare it to standards of journalistic integrity and freedom from bias, in the manner that FAIR tries to do. If the behavior stands up well, good for the journalist. If not, then it does not, regardless of how "evenly balanced" the attacks have been from each side.

[newsguyatl]

8. no

but if leftists are complaining about her "fairness" and rightwingers says she's a "liberal" -- OBVIOUSLY that speaks volumes to her fairness down the middle.

[FrenchieCat]

19. wrong place to post.....

Was not responding to this post.

[flpoljunkie]

23. Judy, like many other "journalists" are not worthy of the name because of

a failure to do their jobs--that is, monitor the sources of power (Dubya and his cronies) and seek the truth.

Judy, too, was obviously reluctant to closely question the Rethugs--perhaps fearing they would not come on CNN--not a good excuse! This trait, she shares, with Wolfie.

That, and her always wanting people to be "nice"--I would describe her as a silly "Rebecca of Sunnybrook farm" type--a weird combination, to say the least.

That is not to say, though, she will not be replaced by the idiots that run CNN with someone worse.

[spooky3]

30. No, it does not, for the reason that I gave. If you were a social

scientist or an HR person, you would have no difficulty understanding that the measure of one's fairness or objectivity or being "in the middle" is not the number of emails or letters she gets from each side (positive or negative) of a self-selected sample, particularly when one side DELIBERATELY attacks everyone who doesn't spout their extremist view and the other side asks only that the journalist be fair.

Anyone's work has to be judged according to appropriately pre-set standards of objectivity and quality.

[sundancekid]

49. well said!

The previous poster's argument does NOT put JW in the center at all ... for example, if she were half-way between the center and the extreme right, the progressives would STILL find her carrying the bushevik water, and at the same time, the extreme RW'ers would also STILL bellow.
End of story.

[Disturbed]

9. Maybe the Bush Junta...

stopped depositing money in her offshore account?

[janx]

11. Newsguy, a question:

To what extent are the cable talking heads "programmed"? Crossfire was obviously scripted, but what about the other cable personalities? Who writes their material?

[newsguyatl]

15. each show has a team of writers

and a producer and executive producer... it's pretty much whatever they collectively come up with...

with the political unit, there are a few more managerial types up in washington who try to stick their heads in and shake things up a bit.

[janx]

17. That's what I suspected, except there are more involved than

I thought. She has certainly "done her time." Maybe now she can (as she says she wants to) write, teach, and do those documentaries.

[FrenchieCat]

13. Plu-eaze

I've seen Judy totally cut and paste accusation of very good Democrats right there in front of my screen. Taking "Drudge" news and reporting it with a straight face. Not clearifying when the info pushed was found to be erroneous. Holding poll numbers that were full of shit. Asking tough questions of Democrat guests, and leading softballs to Republicans. Talking with other uninformed Pundits right through the speakers appearing at the Democratic Convention... Reporting on nonsense most of the time...that no one is even remotely interested in...then stating that "we show it, because viewers are interested"--Big time bullshit line.

I stopped watching CNN specifically because of Judy and Wolf. Neither are nothing but sock puppets for the real agenda of the Corporate media....and it isn't advancing the views of anyone but the corporations.

Judy ain't stupid.....but she needed the job. That's what one would call a whore..doing it for the money. It's disgusting and I hope that she realizes sooner than later (if she hasn't yet) her true role in tearing down our democracy and setting up the Mediacracy and the Facism that it really stands for.

I know about CNN and it's first cousin ABC and it's 2nd cousin Time Magazine....with help from the Gallup poll reported propaganda in manipulating our elections...the march to war.....and on and on.....round and round....

When you couple that with Msnbc, NBC, cNBC and the not so distant cousin Newsweek....

and Fox and it's New York Post and Daily News.....

What you end up with is Disney, Time-Warner, General Electric and Murdock telling us what's good for us....but really it's what's good for them. Anyone advancing this corporate agenda toward Facism (Corporate run Government) is not to be respected but loathed, feared and shunned.

So you can THINK that she was innocent and doing something right....I just know better. She can lay in the bed that she made, or try to rationalize her career. Bottomline is she can look in the mirror....look at the state of today's media and understand that when you are not part of the solution....you are the problem. She was and is that. No doubt about it. She may be a "legend in her own mind"....but she's no journalist for years now.

Sell your "she must have been doing something right" to those same gullible souls watching television without a clue. I for one, have no interest in what you are peddling. It's hogwash, and you most likely know it.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Profound statement, I guess

But really not addressing anything I have said.

Sometimes, it's the silence that speaks the loudest.

But if you are alluding to wanting to make an indirect point that I might be pissed.....you're damn tootin'. I'm glad that I am able to translate my emotions into text.

The media is important to our democracy...and currently, it ain't there. Some print media and the net is all that's left.

The truth hurts, don't it?

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

28. You can call the truth

viciousness, anger, bitterness or whatever strikes your fancy....and again not respond to the real issues that I mentioned....like the circular puppets that pass as the press these days, i.e., have a writer from Newsweek on MSnbc "reporting" on some unfounded rumor as though it is a fact, to lend it credence...when it's nothing but manufactured news coming straight from Drudge.

Diversion is a nice tactic....and you changing the subject really won't get you off the hook.

Skinner has nothing to do with this. Why you should bring him up is a mystery to me.

[Crunchy Frog]

29. What, you mean Democrats are bitter and angry

about the corporate media's role in undermining our democracy and propping up the Bu$h regime? If that's what you're saying, you're damn right I'm bitter and angry.

I don't know why you're bringing Skinner into it though. I don't expect he's too happy with the role of the corporate media either.:shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

37. I'm watching an example of the Bullshit that I was talking about in

another post.

Right now, on Hardball...you've got Matthews interviewing the wife of Greenspan, Andrea scarface Mitchell.

and interviewing Fineman, Newsweek reporter(Newsweek is nothing by MSnbc in print), speculating what Bush will be maybe saying.

Like how is that journalism?

Now Matthews is interviewing Scarborough, former Republican Representative turned media hoe.

Matthews could have just talked to himself. Why have three seats plus his all filled with talking heads? Where's the news value in that?

That's what I'm talking about. All of this speculating and manufacturing...for what?
To control the agenda...that's for what.

[dogman]

42. She did something Right alright.

She helped lead the cheers for B$$$co at CNN. I'm sure the GOP leaning management got what they wanted from her. The public got less news and more spin. Remember when journalists were honest brokers of information. Now there are news readers and spinners for the corporate owned media. I was sad to see her go a long time ago. I haven't admired or respected her for years.

[thebigidea]

59. fret not, there will always be another android to take her place

you work for them, don't you? I'd say this cancels out your "freepers AND liberals hate her, so she can't be biased!" argument fairly easily.

I can't imagine the contortions you'd have to do on a day to day basis to convince yourself of that... phew.

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

10. Bye-Bye Judy, don't let the door

hit you in the arse on the way out either!!!

[rzemanfl]

12. Isn't it a fact that in a restaurant in the 1980's * called Woodruff's

husband (Al Hunt?) a "f***king -----------" in front of their then 4 year-old child? I think that having to deal with that memory had an effect on her when the obnoxious drunk was ordained "Prezdint."

[FrenchieCat]

14. It should have made her less of a Whore.....

but it didn't.

[Crunchy Frog]

31. Maybe it's like the whore

who likes to keep going back to the pimp that beats her. :shrug:

[Dave Sund]

18. It's NOT the journalists

It's the executives! Even Lou Dobbs is forced to read a ridiculous news story about Randi Rhodes yesterday. The only reason these people aren't pushing hard is because their corporate masters won't let them. We need a network that has integrity. Unfortunately, the conglomerates own everything, now.

[FrenchieCat]

22. But that is why the term "whore".

They know what they are doing, and they know that it is not what their profession would direct, and still they do it.

It can start from the top down. If they had these freaks speaking out in unison, it might be harder for the networks and cable 24/7 to get rid of them all. As it is, they do what they are told, collect their paychecks....meanwhile we fight unjustified wars that kill our soldiers and the innocent, rob our treasury, etc...

It's like the little nazis that didn't speak out. In my mind, they were just as guilty...collectively.

[Dave Sund]

24. Oh, I agree

But the media isn't going to change if these people leave... In fact, it's probably going to get even worse. Keith Olbermann is about the only person on cable news who doesn't restrain himself for the network.

[borg5575]

27. I fear for his longevity.

I am afraid that the network suits may soon do to him what they did to Phil Donahue.

[janx]

33. True--about it's getting worse if they leave.

At least the two being reviled in this thread are old enough to remember working for the media before it got this bad.

And it's no surprise that Woodruff is heading for documentaries.

[rzemanfl]

26. Could we think about changing "media whore" to "media

mercenary?" Why insult the prostitutes? At least they have something somebody wants...

[tinanator]

50. fascist media

put it in a nutshell and stop blaming the messenger, whether kneepad equipped steno or network exec.

[Cuban_Liberal]

20. Woo hooooooooooo!

:woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause::woohoo::applause:

[Still_Loves_John]

32. I've always liked Judy Woodruff

And I've never heard her say anything as outrageous as, say, Wolf Blitzer.

I have seen plenty of posts on DU that try and twist inconsequential comments of hers into big deals, though.

[FrenchieCat]

34. Well, I believe that I saw the Tidy Bowl Liars

talking to Judy about John Kerry...and she didn't seem to have any facts to question them at the time. Guess that was "twisting" an inconsequential comment....uh?

That whole "unconsequential" affair cost us the election! Doh!

[Still_Loves_John]

36. Thats a problem all the news guys have

They can never get any answers out of their interviews, who just spout their talking points whatever they are asked--I always thought that Woodruff seemed exhasperated by this, and I'm sure its part of why she's leaving.

I definatly don't think she was a perfect journalist, but I also think she got a lot of undue grief around here. I think because she hosted a political show, people took out her anger on her every time she had a guest she didn't like, or read a poll they didn't like. There were topics where, say, a guest would be talking about invading Iraq, she would summarize his comments when he was done by saying "we need to invade Iraq." While the tone of her voice made it obvious that she was just summarizing his position, there would be a thread on DU about how she was whoring for warmongers. This happened all the time, and while I recognize that she was too soft sometimes, I think most of the complaints against her are unfounded.

[FrenchieCat]

38. You obviously didn't see the CNN Primary Debate....

Where Judy Woodgruff made a total and complete ass out of herself. She talked more than the debaters....and was scolding them and trying to trick them into gotcha answers. If that's journalism, then I'm the Czar of Russia!

Again, Woodruff was no more than a "legend in her own mind"...and yours too, I guess.

[Still_Loves_John]

39. I actually did see the primary debates

and I didn't have any problems. To be honest, though, I really don't remember anything that oustanding happening, so if you could give me an example of something she did I'd be open to it.

[FrenchieCat]

45. Maybe you had the mute button on....

that's the only explanation I can conjure up.....for your take on those CNN debates.

[Still_Loves_John]

46. Alright

Prove me wrong. I would genuinely appreciate an example of something you found wrong with what she said. Honestly, this isn't like a challenge or anything--I'm not some obsessive Judy Woodruff fan--I would really like to see an example of Woodruff being a bad moderator.

[FrenchieCat]

51. OK. I was never one to turn down a good challenge.....

here we go!
http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/2230.html
by Gene Lyons
October 15, 2003
Nine candidates isn’t a political contest, it’s a litter. With all nine standing behind podiums in a semi-circle, the CNN exercise resembled less a debate than a game show, with emcee Judy Woodruff preening, posing, interrupting, scolding, and generally acting as if she--as the representative of Washington’s celebrity press corps--were the star, and the candidates hapless contestants to be discarded in favor of next week’s nobodies. On one or two occasions, Woodruff actually turned her back and walked away from a candidate giving an answer that evidently displeased her.
--------
http://www.valuejudgment.org/archives/000219.html
Comments
Yeah, she got on my nerves, prancing around the stage, cutting people off.

Dean did OK...nothing stellar, and nothing bad. He and Kucinich pinned all the "voted-for-the-war-and-now-trying-to-act-like-they-didn't" guys to the wall once or twice. It was sickening to listen to Gephardt, Kerry, Lieberman, and (yes, even) Edwards try to make it sound as if they had stood up to dubya on the war...

In retrospect, I wish I had just gone to bed.
--------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60333-2003Dec12.html Judy Woodruff on CNN asked Wes Clark if he stood by his criticism last week when he called Dubya "reckless."
"Judy, I stand by my words," Clark replied, clearly giving Judy an answer she was not expecting. How did she respond? By asking Clark again whether he stood by his words "even on this day." So, now we're not supposed to criticize the administration on "good" days? And how come I didn't hear a single reporter (and I admit I might have missed this) ask an administration or GOP member -- hey, wasn't this war about WMD? Please, Howie, tell me about the liberal media again!
----------
http://www.democrats.org/blog/comment/00010084.html
I would expect the DNC to call for the resignation of Judy Woodruff from her job at CNN. I would also call for the DNC to ask for a new debate. I have never in 51 years seen such a disgusting display on live television. This was nothing but pure crap and nonsense.

Posted by F. Mitchell @ 10/9/03, 10:01 PM :: Email
It was the worst debate I have ever watched and CNN needs to appologize to every candidate (except Kerry) for wasting the candidate's time.

What's up with Judy? Is a debate moderator supposed to attack the candidates like she did. Clark (the DNC and Clinton's choice) was put on the defensive and kept explaining and reexplaining what? Who knows anymore?

Judy needs to be fired from CNN and Kerry's low blow to Dean only fueled our fire. Dean will be the next president of the US.

Gebhardt does debate well, I won't take that away from him. But he does not have the people behind him.

Posted by Theresa Skira @ 10/9/03, 10:12 PM :: Email
Well, that was certainly a disappointment.

Woodruff is Kerry's bagman?

That was one of the worse debate formats I've ever seen. The DNC should demand their imprimatur back. Holy shit.

Posted by Cynthia in Massachusetts @ 10/9/03, 10:22 PM
---------
http://www.arbiteronline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/10/23/3f975ca178c91
When Sharpton began to answer a question by the moderator, Judy Woodruff of CNN, Woodruff cut him off with a follow-up comment. Sharpton immediately shot back with, “Now are you going to take that off my time, or what?” Woodruff meekly shuffled back and let Sharpton continue with his answer. Again, the crowd snickered their approval.
--------

IS THIS ENOUGH?

[Still_Loves_John]

52. Well, no actually

That was basically a bunch of opinions off of blogs. I mean, she cut people off? Good! Once a guy just uses a question as a springboard into his little prepared comment, I want the interviewer to cut him off once he's answered the question.

There was one viable thing in there--the Howard Kurtz one, but I'm not even sure about that. Lots of times, Judy will ask a "tough" question to a dem thats really nothing more than a thinly disguised softbal. Like this one, for example. She was really giving Clark an opportunity to brush the charge away.

Or maybe she wasn't. I dunno. I'm not trying to say that she's some great, intrepid journalist. I just think some people are unnecessarily harsh, and the rest of the things you posted really just back that up; besides the Howard Kurtz interview, it was just a more general complaints.

[FrenchieCat]

54. Well, let me say this

Cause I see that I'm wasting my time.

Once I realized that my word and my memories didn't mean shit to you....I played and went and located the words of others.

What in the fuck else did you think I was going to bring back...when you asked for "proof" and "evidence"? Doh!

I sure wish that the mediawhores were as skeptical as you are about all of the bullshit news they put out. I sure wish they required proof and evidence!

So as far as I'm concerned...if Gene Lyons (who wrote "The Hunting of the President) doesn't do it for you...along with the other testimonies, including other posters here, then you don't need me to talk you into anything.

Hey, why don't you look for comments that says she did a great job and report back to me.

In the end, it's not like a give a good god damn what you think to that extent.

As long as the whore is leaving, I'm happy....

keep respecting and admiring Judy why-you-arrogant-little-slut Woodgruff.

Afterall, somebody's got to do it....so it might as well be you.

PS. Maybe I'll do a poll!

[Still_Loves_John]

60. ?

"What in the fuck else did you think I was going to bring back...when you asked for "proof" and "evidence"? Doh!"

Well, I thought you were going to bring back actual quotes and concrete examples of things she did wrong; you just gave me some quotes from people who agreed with you. I understand that lots of people don't like her; you really didn't convince me of anything. Same with a poll. OK, so lots of people agree with you. I'm asking why.

And I resent your tone. I've tried to be civil and you consistently respond with invective and ad hominem attacks.

[Crunchy Frog]

53. Thanks for bringing back all those lovely memories Frenchie.

Yes, I remember that debate well, although I had been trying to repress it.:puke:

Since Howard Dean is asking for our suggestions about changes to the primaries, one of the things that I want to suggest is bringing back the League of Women Voters to moderate the debates the way they used to. The media whore moderated debates were an unmitigated disaster.

[Crunchy Frog]

35. Maybe she ran out of skin for facelifts or something.

I'm sure not sorry to see the dried up old gasbag whore go though. I used to like her okay back when she was at PBS, but lately she's been just unbelievably aweful. I still remember the candidate's debate that she moderated and she was by far the worst out of all of them and that's saying alot.

Thank God I don't get cable anymore, so I can avoid having to watch whores like her, but it still makes me sick what they're doing to our democracy.

This is what I think of her employer.



Oh, and Judy, you left journalism long ago.

[formernaderite]

40. Wow...she's only 58?

I actually met her about 15 years ago....and thought she was 50 then.

[FrenchieCat]

41. Probably lying about her age....

and it's not like it doesn't come easy to her.

[Donna Zen]

43. CNN is a shallow infotainment network

that barely has three actual credible reporters left...and Woodruff is not one of them.

I listen closely to Judy Woodruff's framing techniques: but...but...but, negating everything that was just answered in response to a question. And her smarmy little quips after the guest had left the screen: if a Dem, the comment might be "well, that is what the Democrats want us to believe" but if the departing wonder-head was a republican, Judy gushed out "well, you heard it here." Bitch. Or how about the time she chortled: "Well, here come those pesky Democrats."

She did squirm happily for a few Democrats, the kind that can get you the "right" tickets for the Aspen Institute. But let a Kucinich appear, and the woman turned into a negative, pandering fool.

The swiftboaters were the final Woodriffian straw. She treated them as God's own messengers constantly playing and replaying their lies with gusto and approval.

So for those who think to defend Woodruff or any of the other losers picking up those fat anchor paychecks, tell me how hard any of them tried to get to the bottom of the WMD lies. No. They were hoping for all the face-time shock and awe would bring them. The blood is on their hands and that includes Woodruff.

The only "down" side of Woodruff leaving is that her replacement is bound to be worse. Candy might take over...yeah, that is about the level of CNN's aspirations these days.

[FrenchieCat]

44. Candy Crawley....

Yuk...that's like 2 of Judy.

Oh well, we'll just have to take them down as they come.

Wish they could get rid of Limbaugh's anorexic girlfriend in the morning (on the westcoast here). She's really, really bad too.

I remember that Black anchor guy they had on with her before. He was terrible. You could tell he really was forcing himself to be phony...and it showed. Limpballs' girlfriend....well, it's easy for here.

Yuk...the more I think about CNN, the more my stomach turns. I'll be so glad when Sue and Joe Couch potato finally figure out the fraud being committed upon them.

[Tom Rinaldo]

48. They have have been trying to marginalize Aaron Brown also

One of the few people left at CNN I still have any respect for. Now they promote Paula Zahn as their top news anchor. What a joke. She barely pulled off old her morning gig, and that is giving her more credit than the facts allow.

[high density]

55. CNN is totally useless

I hope some CNN execs saw the clips from "The Daily Show" this week. I used to watch that network all of the time but it's such a waste now. It's so sad... I can't say I really care for any of their anchors. Cooper and Brown seemed like good anchors at ABC News before they joined CNN, but I think CNN has drained out everything that was once good about them. There was a bit of a resurgence during the tsunami coverage but that didn't last three weeks before they were back to talking about crap.

[JI7]

47. good riddance to the disgusting whore, but they will just replace her

with another whore.

but she certainly is one of the worst there is.

[dzika]

56. 1 down 499 to go...

But if she is replaced with a Faux News/Nancy Grace-type then it's just another step of CNN's descent into right-wing hell.

After all, the GOP needs its' "moderate" network to be ready to cheer them on in 2006. Just thinking of all the upcoming bullshit reporting makes me giddy.

[rman]

57. The stable is still a whore house

nothing has changed

[FrenchieCat]

58. True, true...

But we'll just have keep trying to clean house and hopefully, at some point, enough people will "get it", and we can raise a new barn!

What else can we do?

Wait on Al Gore? I hope he hurries it up!