Title : Stelter's plaint would mean more if he'd face up to how badly CNN's Sanjay Gupta fared when he sat down with Joe Rogan.
link : Stelter's plaint would mean more if he'd face up to how badly CNN's Sanjay Gupta fared when he sat down with Joe Rogan.
Stelter's plaint would mean more if he'd face up to how badly CNN's Sanjay Gupta fared when he sat down with Joe Rogan.
CNN’s @brianstelter: People trusting Joe Rogan over “newsrooms like CNN” are “a problem that’s much bigger than Spotify” pic.twitter.com/3RnifScIzk
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) February 1, 2022
Background: "CNN praises Dr. Sanjay Gupta for interview with Joe Rogan, buries viral moments/Gupta admitted his CNN colleagues should not have referred to Rogan's COVID treatment as 'horse dewormer'" (NY Post, October 15, 2021). That's something I blogged at the time, here: "In trying to present Sanjay Gupta as a science-is-real hero for talking to Joe Rogan for 3 hours, CNN laid the groundwork for fact-checkers to draw attention to all the most damaging omissions."
ADDED: Writing this post and searching my own archive for Sanjay Gupta, I turned up a post from January 7, 2009, when President-Elect Obama was considering Gupta for the position of Surgeon General. There was debate at the time about the way Gupta had treated the filmmaker Michael Moore about his movie "Sicko."
The NYT columnist Paul Krugman had written that "Gupta specifically claimed that Moore 'fudged his facts,' when the truth was that on every one of the allegedly fudged facts, Moore was actually right and CNN was wrong."
Krugman observed: "Moore is an outsider, he’s uncouth, so he gets smeared as unreliable even though he actually got it right."
And isn't that a bit like Joe Rogan? He's an an outsider, uncouth, and he'll get smeared as unreliable even when he actually gets it right. Meanwhile, his mainstream media antagonists are counting on their appearing glossily professional. As I said back in 2009: "Gupta is couth, an expert at projecting competence, expertise, and level-headedness."
But I defended Gupta at the time:
Gupta was immediately called to account, and he stepped up to it. And what of Moore? Is he accountable? Moore may have not been wrong on this occasion, but he's been wrong in the past about plenty of things, and his entire filmmaking style is based on a strong point of view — that is, bias — that involves distortion and emotive exaggeration. Does Moore make corrections and apologize? His method involves going doggedly forward toward his predetermined goals — like government-managed health care or opposition to the war or gun control. So it's quite sensible... to be skeptical when Moore speaks.
At the same time, we listen to Moore — some of us — because he's got an artistic style that is often lively and funny and thought-provoking. He's chosen his uncouth, rebel style, and he uses his style every bit as successfully as Gupta uses his. Moore has scarcely been ostracized for his outsider manner. He's very popular. Some people hate him, but he's choosing to antagonize those people — it's part of his the polemical style that has made him rich and famous. So don't cry for Michael Moore, give Sanjay Gupta the credit he deserves, and don't swallow anything whole, whether it's served up by rebel filmmakers or sophisticated doctors.
That's what I said 12 years ago, and I'm reprinting it now because we're still talking about Gupta and, more importantly, I think the comparison of Joe Rogan to Michael Moore could be helpful.
By the way, Michael Moore has a podcast:
CNN’s @brianstelter: People trusting Joe Rogan over “newsrooms like CNN” are “a problem that’s much bigger than Spotify” pic.twitter.com/3RnifScIzk
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) February 1, 2022
Background: "CNN praises Dr. Sanjay Gupta for interview with Joe Rogan, buries viral moments/Gupta admitted his CNN colleagues should not have referred to Rogan's COVID treatment as 'horse dewormer'" (NY Post, October 15, 2021). That's something I blogged at the time, here: "In trying to present Sanjay Gupta as a science-is-real hero for talking to Joe Rogan for 3 hours, CNN laid the groundwork for fact-checkers to draw attention to all the most damaging omissions."
ADDED: Writing this post and searching my own archive for Sanjay Gupta, I turned up a post from January 7, 2009, when President-Elect Obama was considering Gupta for the position of Surgeon General. There was debate at the time about the way Gupta had treated the filmmaker Michael Moore about his movie "Sicko."
The NYT columnist Paul Krugman had written that "Gupta specifically claimed that Moore 'fudged his facts,' when the truth was that on every one of the allegedly fudged facts, Moore was actually right and CNN was wrong."
Krugman observed: "Moore is an outsider, he’s uncouth, so he gets smeared as unreliable even though he actually got it right."
And isn't that a bit like Joe Rogan? He's an an outsider, uncouth, and he'll get
But I defended Gupta at the time:
Gupta was immediately called to account, and he stepped up to it. And what of Moore? Is he accountable? Moore may have not been wrong on this occasion, but he's been wrong in the past about plenty of things, and his entire filmmaking style is based on a strong point of view — that is, bias — that involves distortion and emotive exaggeration. Does Moore make corrections and apologize? His method involves going doggedly forward toward his predetermined goals — like government-managed health care or opposition to the war or gun control. So it's quite sensible... to be skeptical when Moore speaks.
At the same time, we listen to Moore — some of us — because he's got an artistic style that is often lively and funny and thought-provoking. He's chosen his uncouth, rebel style, and he uses his style every bit as successfully as Gupta uses his. Moore has scarcely been ostracized for his outsider manner. He's very popular. Some people hate him, but he's choosing to antagonize those people — it's part of his the polemical style that has made him rich and famous. So don't cry for Michael Moore, give Sanjay Gupta the credit he deserves, and don't swallow anything whole, whether it's served up by rebel filmmakers or sophisticated doctors.
That's what I said 12 years ago, and I'm reprinting it now because we're still talking about Gupta and, more importantly, I think the comparison of Joe Rogan to Michael Moore could be helpful.
By the way, Michael Moore has a podcast:
Thus articles Stelter's plaint would mean more if he'd face up to how badly CNN's Sanjay Gupta fared when he sat down with Joe Rogan.
You now read the article Stelter's plaint would mean more if he'd face up to how badly CNN's Sanjay Gupta fared when he sat down with Joe Rogan. with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2022/02/stelters-plaint-would-mean-more-if-hed.html
Related Posts :
You need to read this Twitter thread about Northern Ireland- House Republicans Pass Bill to Rein In Dodd-Frank...
Bill Maher nonapologizes and gets grudging absolution from Michael Eric Dyson (who — see if you notice — has a book he wants to sell).- The U.S. Congress Wants To Know When Cyber Weapons Are Used
This Is The U.S. Navy's Plan To Crush Russia's And China's Air Defenses
0 Response to "Stelter's plaint would mean more if he'd face up to how badly CNN's Sanjay Gupta fared when he sat down with Joe Rogan."
Post a Comment