Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Trump is “Thankful” to Putin for Expelling U.S. Diplomats From Russia

Late last month, President Vladimir Putin decided to expel 775 U.S. diplomats and staffers from the U.S. Embassy and consulates in Russia. Yesterday, President Donald Trump commented on that decision for the first time. Trump said that he is very thankful to Putin for helping him cut down the payroll and that it was great that he let “a large number of people” go. “There’s no real reason for them to go back. I greatly appreciate the fact that we’ve been able to cut our payroll of the United States. We’re going to save a lot of money,” he said. Some people thought it was a way to troll Putin.

I get it! Trump’s using reverse psychology on Putin … as some 2nd grade teachers do. Certain to work on a KGB trained killler/dictator. https://t.co/J6v5HY3h06

— Ronald Klain (@RonaldKlain) August 11, 2017

But Trump was not clear on whether he was actually joking, and a lot of people were baffled that the president took the increased tensions with Russia so lightly, as well as hundreds of people losing their jobs. Former Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul was not entertained and pointed out that the diplomatic staff in Russia provides the U.S. with invaluable information about the country, which is an incredibly important function.

Imagine wanting to know less about Russia’s military modernization! That’s what Trump praised today. https://t.co/qMorkknjhU

— Michael McFaul (@McFaul) August 10, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 11, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Throughout the campaign and the beginning of his presidency, President Donald Trump has criticized a lot of different people. But there is one group that he has consistently attacked with passion and fervor like no other: “The Media”

His attacks are blunt and relentless, he has gone after world-renowned organizations like the New York Times, and has even posted a video meme of himself attacking a CNN icon, calling it the “Fraud News Network.”

#FraudNewsCNN #FNN pic.twitter.com/WYUnHjjUjg

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 2, 2017

Wow, the Failing @nytimes said about @foxandfriends “….the most powerful T.V. show in America.”

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 27, 2017

He contends that these major news corporations are “enemies” to his administration because they consistently post critical stories.

But now Trump seems to have found a solution to counteract “Fake News”… his own “Real News”. On Sunday, the Trump presidential campaign announced a short weekly segment on its Facebook page called “Real News.” The show aims to be a brief two minute recap of news about the Trump Administration, straight from Trump Tower. The show is hosted by Kayleigh McEnany, a Trump-supporting CNN pundit, who resigned from her position at CNN to work on the show as well as become a spokesperson for the GOP.

While the resources to produce the show are not directly coming from Trump himself, investigative reports from The Daily Beast and Mic show that the effort is being spearheaded by Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law. The money is coming from a PAC that is raising money for Trump’s reelection campaign.

Though the show aims to produce so-called “real news,” it seems to focus more on touting Trump’s accomplishments than anything else. In the two minute segment McEnany discussed Trump’s new immigration policy, data that showed global economic confidence at an all-time high, and Trump awarding a medal to a Vietnam veteran.

It’s fair to note that this is not the first time a president has had his own “information” show. Obama’s administration hosted a weekly video series titled “West Wing Week,” which discussed the activities going on in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue during the week. Nevertheless people all over social media couldn’t get enough of the idea of Trump TV and its quest for “real news.”

Donald Trump’s “Real News” seems kinda familiar. pic.twitter.com/TAMDYHGtXq

— Zac Richey (@the_zacsta) August 2, 2017

This is the person reporting the “Real News” from Trump Tower on Trump TV.

In New York.

The End. https://t.co/tgyWJMWk9S

— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) August 7, 2017

The left must be going crazy knowing #Trump TV is “Real News”
Those who laugh last, laugh best!#MAGA #DrainTheWashingtonSwamp #YesWeWill pic.twitter.com/43erYELDin

— Joel Fischer (@JoelFischerNYC) August 7, 2017

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Trump’s “Real News” Sparks Social Media Reactions appeared first on Law Street.

The Reddit user who edited and spread the now-famous video clip of President Donald Trump wrestling a person with a CNN logo for a head has issued an apology. The user goes by the name “HanA**holeSolo,” and wrote a lengthy post apologizing to the whole Reddit community.

“I am in no way this kind of person. I love and accept people of all walks of life and have done so my entire life,” he wrote.

He went on to say that he does not support any kind of violence and that he posted hateful, controversial posts to get attention from other users. This then became a form of addiction, as he wanted to see how far he could go.

“Free speech is a right we all have, but it shouldn’t be used in the manner that it was in the posts that were put on this site,” he said.

Redditor HanAssholeSolo, the guy who posted the Trump/CNN clip the president tweeted, has apologized to @CNN, the media, and others pic.twitter.com/GlePoiSlFj

— Brandon Wall (@Walldo) July 4, 2017

The user has since deleted his account, so the statement is no longer available. But a lot of people are questioning whether the apology is sincere, or if it’s just another step in the “trolling.” Some pointed out that the apology didn’t come until after CNN had tracked down and identified the user.

On the other hand, a lot of people criticized CNN and accused the media network of blackmail after it published an article about how its journalists tracked down the Reddit user. In the article, CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski wrote that HanA**holeSolo was identified through a Facebook search using information he had written himself on Reddit.

When Kaczynski tried contacting him, he got no reply. But on Tuesday, HanA**holeSolo posted his apology. After that, HanA**holeSolo contacted CNN to confirm his identity and expressed that he was nervous about being exposed. CNN wrote:

CNN is not publishing ‘HanA**holeSolo’s’ name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again.

It followed up with, “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.” A lot of people on the right took that as a threat and started using the hashtag #CNNBlackmail.

If only @CNN spent as much time tracking down info on IRS targeting, Fast & Furious, Iran deal etc as they did a meme writer! #CNNBlackmail

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) July 5, 2017

However, Kaczynski said in a tweet that HanA**holeSolo had called him to say that he completely agrees with the article’s statement, and that he did not perceive anything it said as a threat.

The user has previously posted things on the pro-Trump subreddit The_Donald that makes it hard for some to believe that the apology is sincere. In June, he posted a chart of CNN employees with Jewish Stars of David next to their images, writing, “Something strange about CNN…can’t quite put my finger on it.”

On Sunday, he wrote “F**k ISLAM,” and commented on a photo of refugees, “There’s a MOAB (Mother of All Bomb’s) for that.” Reportedly, he also frequently used slurs to describe African-Americans, women, and Muslims. He has also attacked Black Lives Matter, feminism, Islam, liberals, and the state of Maryland.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post CNN Faces Backlash for Article About Reddit User Who Made Trump Video appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Thousands March in LA for President Trump’s Impeachment

Yesterday, thousands of protesters marched on the streets in downtown Los Angeles to demand President Donald Trump’s impeachment. “Down, down, down with Trump–up, up, up with the people,” they chanted. Similar protests are scheduled to take place in other cities in California and the United States. “Every day when I wake up, something is more terrible than it was yesterday,” one protester, John Meranda, said. Before the demonstration started, counter-protesters gathered outside the LAPD headquarters.

One anti-Trump demonstrator screaming at pro-Trump folks, including, “You’re a fraud! You’re a fraud! You’re a fraud!” pic.twitter.com/OpDwnd9xnp

— Laura J. Nelson (@laura_nelson) July 2, 2017

Democratic Representative Brad Sherman spoke from the stage at a rally close to LA’s City Hall, and urged other congressmen to begin an impeachment process. “We have to act now to protect our country from abuse of power and impulsive, ignorant incompetence,” he said. Even though many lawmakers have talked about impeachment, Sherman has actually taken action by drafting articles of impeachment in which he accuses Trump of trying to disrupt the investigation into Michael Flynn.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 3, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Kathy Griffin apologized for going “way too far,” after a photo surfaced online of the comedian posing with a bloodied decapitated head, modeled to look like President Donald Trump. In a 30-second video posted to Twitter late Tuesday, Griffin said that she “sincerely” apologizes.

“I’m a comic,” she said. “I cross the line. I move the line, then I cross it. I went way too far. The image is too disturbing. I understand how it offends people. It wasn’t funny. I get it…I am going to ask the photographer to take the image. I went too far. I made a mistake and I was wrong.”

I am sorry. I went too far. I was wrong. pic.twitter.com/LBKvqf9xFB

— Kathy Griffin (@kathygriffin) May 30, 2017

The images leaked to TMZ were shot by controversial photographer Tyler Shields. Griffin was reportedly inspired by a 2011 episode of “Game of Thrones,” which featured a severed head modeled after former President George W. Bush.

Griffin initially defended the photo, likening it to Trump’s controversial comments about Megyn Kelly’s menstrual cycle.

“1/ I caption this “there was blood coming out of his eyes, blood coming out of his…wherever” Also @tylershields great Photog/film maker,” she wrote. “2/ OBVIOUSLY, I do not condone ANY violence by my fans or others to anyone, ever! I’m merely mocking the Mocker in Chief.”

According to TMZ, Griffin even “joked that she and Tyler would need to move to Mexico once the pics got released, for fear they’d be thrown in prison,” during the photo shoot.

Trump responded to the image Wednesday morning on Twitter, saying Griffin “should be ashamed of herself,” and that Barron was “having a hard time with this.”

Kathy Griffin should be ashamed of herself. My children, especially my 11 year old son, Barron, are having a hard time with this. Sick!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 31, 2017

The first lady also had some choice words for the comedian.

“As a mother, a wife, and a human being, that photo is very disturbing,” Melania Trump said in a statement. “When you consider some of the atrocities happening in the world today, a photo opportunity like this is simply wrong and makes you wonder about the mental health of the person who did it.”

The image managed to unite much of the country, receiving bipartisan outrage on social media.

This is vile and wrong. It is never funny to joke about killing a president. https://t.co/zIiuKoMyFw

— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) May 30, 2017

Disgusting but not surprising. This is the left today. They consider this acceptable. Imagine a conservative did this to Obama as POTUS? https://t.co/QdghcbIjS7

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 30, 2017

This Kathy Griffin thing is so upsetting and disgusting. Jesus–what is wrong with people today? Have we lost all our humanity?

— Soledad O’Brien (@soledadobrien) May 30, 2017

All of it frankly makes me sick. And seeing these actions only through a lens of partisanship or self is bizarre to me.

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) May 31, 2017

Our politics have become too base, too low, & too vulgar, but Kathy Griffin’s post descends into an even more repugnant & vile territory.

— Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) May 30, 2017

Following the backlash, Griffin, who has been the longtime co-host of CNN’s annual New Years Eve coverage, was fired from the network Wednesday.

CNN has terminated our agreement with Kathy Griffin to appear on our New Year’s Eve program.

— CNN Communications (@CNNPR) May 31, 2017

Anderson Cooper, Griffin’s friend and NYE co-host for the past decade, condemned the photo on Wednesday.

For the record, I am appalled by the photo shoot Kathy Griffin took part in. It is clearly disgusting and completely inappropriate.

— Anderson Cooper (@andersoncooper) May 31, 2017

There’s no word yet as to whether or not this will affect her other partnerships, or upcoming comedy tour.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Kathy Griffin Apologizes for Bloody Anti-Trump Photo Shoot appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Woman on Trial for Laughing During Jeff Sessions’ Confirmation Hearing

A female activist who was arrested back in January during Jeff Sessions’ confirmation hearing will stand trial. Desiree Fairooz laughed at one point during the hearing and was subsequently arrested. Prosecutors decided to pursue charges this week. Officer Katherine Coronado arrested Fairooz, 61, for laughing when Senator Richard Shelby said that Sessions’ record of treating all Americans equally is well-documented. According to Coronado, the laughter was loud enough to disrupt the hearing.

Another protester escorted out of Sessions hearing. Her original offense appeared to be simply laughing. pic.twitter.com/p6lWzBVFRW

— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) January 10, 2017

Fairooz said her laughter was an involuntary reflex to what she heard. And many people expressed their support of Fairooz, saying it was understandable to laugh, as Shelby’s statement was not particularly accurate. In fact, Sessions was rejected as a federal judge in 1980 over his views on race. Fairooz is charged with “disorderly and disruptive conduct” and faces up to a $500 fine and six months in prison if convicted.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 3, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

On Wednesday, The Hollywood Reporter released a cover story about CNN’s strategy to rise to the top of the digital media landscape. But the accompanying photo generated controversy when a senior producer for the network tweeted it out, claiming that it represented the “future of media.”

The future of media looks like this.

Proud to be part of this team. @CaseyNeistat @Bourdain @jaketapper @wkamaubell and @CNN chief Zucker pic.twitter.com/B7enhLXqYd

— Josiah Daniel Ryan (@JosiahRyan) March 1, 2017

The cover features the producer, Josiah Ryan, as well as the network’s president Jeff Zucker, anchor Jake Tapper, comedian W. Kamau Bell–who hosts CNN’s show “United Shades of America”—and chef Anthony Bourdain, who hosts “Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown.”

Ryan’s followers were quick to notice something missing about the so-called future of media: there were no women.

The responses ranged from sarcastic to serious, as critics took the opportunity to bring attention to gender disparities in the field. A 2015 report by the Women’s Media Center found that women are still underrepresented in newsrooms across the country. According to the study, 60 percent of news broadcasts are anchored by men, 63 percent of bylines for written articles belong to men, and the proportion of female staffers in newsroom has hovered around 36 percent since 1999.

If this is the case, Twitter users noted that the future of media won’t look too different.

are you sure this is what the future of media looks like because I think maybe this is also what the past & present of media looks like https://t.co/97ws0pVEVP

— Hanif Abdurraqib (@NifMuhammad) March 1, 2017

Some pointed out the irony of the article marking the start of Women’s History Month.

https://twitter.com/NARAL/status/837007640307908610

@JosiahRyan @CaseyNeistat @Bourdain @jaketapper @wkamaubell @CNN great Women's History Month post!! woooo!!!!

— rae paoletta (@PAYOLETTER) March 1, 2017

Though CNN employs well-known journalists and correspondents like Christiane Amanpour, Dana Bash, Erin Burnett, and Brooke Baldwin, none of them were included in the story.

i find it a liiiittle hard to believe THR couldn't find ONE woman at CNN who could sit in on the cover shoot.

— Maya Kosoff (@mekosoff) March 1, 2017

ok come on, this is exhausting. @Bourdain is on here but not a single woman? How is that the future of media? https://t.co/ZzRKX4l7uu

— Olivia Messer (@OliviaMesser) March 1, 2017

One journalist took it upon herself to paint another picture of the future of the media, compiling a list of reporters and writers from a wide range of backgrounds.

since @THR clearly has forgotten that people beyond cis men exist, here's what the *actual* future of media looks like:

— rae paoletta (@PAYOLETTER) March 1, 2017

Sometimes, a gif paints a thousand words.

@JosiahRyan @CaseyNeistat @Bourdain @jaketapper @wkamaubell @CNN pic.twitter.com/zmbobbNmug

— kat calvin (@KatCalvinLA) March 1, 2017

According to advocacy groups like the Representation Project, whose cofounder was behind the documentary “Miss Representation,” when media outlets do not portray women as powerful politicians or journalists—or, in this case, do not give them credit for helping to fight “CNN’s war”–then other women may be discouraged from pursuing high-level jobs that they perceive to be male-dominated. The Hollywood Reporter has also faced backlash before for failing to represent actresses of color specifically, when it hosted an Oscars roundtable of all-white actresses it considered to be Academy Awards contenders in 2015.

When newsrooms are more diverse in terms of not only gender, but race, orientation, religion, or economic background, these factors can contribute to fairer and more well-rounded coverage of the news.

Victoria Sheridan

Victoria is an editorial intern at Law Street. She is a senior journalism major and French minor at George Washington University. She’s also an editor at GW’s student newspaper, The Hatchet. In her free time, she is either traveling or planning her next trip abroad. Contact Victoria at VSheridan@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Twitter Responds to CNN and The Hollywood Reporter: The Future of Media is Female appeared first on Law Street.

Here’s a breakdown of everything that happened to Kellyanne Conway in February:

The Bowling Green Massacre (February 2)

In an interview with Chris Matthews, Conway uses a fabricated massacre to justify the immigration ban.

The Bowling Green Massacre Response (February 3)

The day after the interview, Conway claims she misspoke.

On @hardball @NBCNews @MSNBC I meant to say “Bowling Green terrorists” as reported here:
https://t.co/nB5SwIEoYI

— Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) February 3, 2017

However, the Washington Post finds this isn’t the case, as Conway had referred to the “Bowling Green massacre” three times before.

Credibility Dispute with CNN (February 6)

CNN reportedly declines the White House’s offer to have Conway appear on Jake Tapper’s “State of the Union,” due to “serious questions about [Conway’s] credibility,” according to the New York Times. Conway refutes this claim on Twitter, but is quickly called out by CNN’s PR account.

. @KellyannePolls was offered to SOTU on Sunday by the White House. We passed. Those are the facts.

— CNN Communications (@CNNPR) February 6, 2017

Mika Brzezinski, co-host of “Morning Joe,” tweets a response that suggests MSNBC also declines Conway appearances.

.@CNNPR @KellyannePolls you are not the first.

— Mika Brzezinski (@morningmika) February 6, 2017

The Jake Tapper Interview (February 7)

Conway appears on Tapper’s other show, “The Lead.” The interview garners Tapper acclaim for his relentless grilling. At one point in the interview Conway seems to admit her boss is a liar. The interview also gives the internet Tapper’s resting bitch face:

the look on jake tapper’s face while talking to kellyanne conway… pic.twitter.com/NiQtNSh8Rt

— Nicole Cairns (@nicoleindc) February 7, 2017

The Ethics Violation (February 9) 

On “Fox & Friends,” Conway endorses Ivanka Trump’s Nordstrom clothing line–a violation of an executive branch regulation that prohibits employees from promoting the private gain of friends.

This prompts two members of the House Oversight Committee to send a letter to the White House and the Office of Government Ethics asking for recommendations for disciplinary action against Conway. According to POLITICO, the OGE’s website crashes due to traffic that same day. Later that day, Sean Spicer in a press briefing says Conway was “counseled” for her comments. This causes some controversy within the White House.

The SNL Sketch (February 12)

Presented without comment:

The Michael Flynn Interview Pt. 1 (February 13)

In an MSNBC interview, Conway claims that National Security Adviser Michael Flynn enjoys the “full confidence of the president” despite reports that revealed Flynn lied to Vice President Mike Pence about his communications with Russia’s U.S. ambassador. Flynn resigns later that day.

The Michael Flynn Interview Pt. 2 (February 14)

Conway is interviewed by Matt Lauer the morning after Flynn’s resignation. Lauer grills Conway on the timeline of Flynn’s resignation and Trump’s trust in Flynn. At one point, a frustrated Lauer tells Conway that she isn’t making sense.

The White Nationalist Twitter Account (February 14)

After her Lauer interview, Conway tweets “I serve of the pleasure of @POTUS. His message is my message. His goals are my goals. Uninformed chatter doesn’t matter.”

A Twitter account named “Lib Hypocrisy” responds, praising Conway’s “strength and resiliency” and expressing love for her. Conway subsequently retweets the praise while responding that she loves them back. It is discovered that “Lib Hypocrisy’s” bio includes the hashtags #Nationalist and #WhiteIdentity.

Conway tells Buzzfeed News that she wasn’t the one who retweeted the account, and that someone else has access to her account.

The Office of Government Ethics (February 14)

The OGE responds to the House Oversight Committee’s letter by sending a letter of their own to the White House ethics official, recommending that the White House take disciplinary action against Conway.

“Morning Joe” Ban (February 15)

The “Morning Joe” hosts officially ban Conway from their show because they believe she has lost her credibility.

The Spicer Leaks (February 15)

CNN’s Dylan Byers reports that five sources believe the person who has been leaking stories about Trump’s frustration with Spicer is Conway. They say Conway is doing this place the blame of the administration’s troubles on Spicer and to earn a “lasting place in the President’s inner circle.”

Sidelined (February 22)

You may have noticed there is a week-long gap between this controversy and the last one. Apparently, that was the White House’s intention as, according to CNN Money, the White House sidelined Conway because comments she made during appearances on multiple shows were “off message.”

When the news of the “sidelining” comes out, Conway refutes these claims and says she was invited to shows but wanted to focus on other pieces of her “portfolio.”

Merriam-Webster (February 23)

At the Conservative Political Action Conference, Conway says she doesn’t identify with being a feminist because “[modern-day feminism] seems to be very anti-male, and it certainly is very pro-abortion.” The Merriam-Webster Twitter account then tweets this in response:

’Feminism’ is defined as “the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities.” https://t.co/Zjf7CAPUjL

— Merriam-Webster (@MerriamWebster) February 23, 2017

Misconduct Complaint (February 24)

The Washington Post reports that 15 law professors specializing in legal ethics filed a professional misconduct complaint against Conway, who is a member of the D.C. bar.

The Couch (February 27) 

Presented without comment:

Kellyanne Conway photographed making herself comfortable on Oval Office couch https://t.co/4qeNGFjJWdpic.twitter.com/978aeedbxM

— New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) February 28, 2017

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Kellyanne Conway and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Month appeared first on Law Street.

Last week, CNN aired an investigation that alleged the involvement of Venezuelan Vice President Tareck El Aissami in an operation that issued passports to people with links to terrorism out of its embassy in Baghdad. On Wednesday, in response to the broadcast, Venezuela pulled the plug on CNN en Español. Venezuela’s scuffle with CNN comes a few days after the Trump Administration imposed sanctions on El Aissami, who it says played a “significant role in international narcotics trafficking.”

After a year-long investigation, CNN released its report in a two-part broadcast on February 6 and 8. Out of the Venezuelan embassy in Baghdad, officials issued over 150 passports in exchange for thousands of dollars, the CNN report said. According to intelligence documents obtained by CNN, El Aissami, 42, directed the passport-for-cash operation. At least some of the passports were issued to members of Hezbollah, an Iran-backed Lebanese jihadist group that the State Department considers a terrorist group.

A little more than a week after its report aired, the Spanish-language version of CNN was pulled in Venezuela. The English-language CNN channel remains on the air. Responding to Venezuela’s silencing, a CNN spokesperson said: “We believe in the vital role that freedom of the press plays in a healthy democracy. Today, the government of Venezuela pulled our television signal, denying Venezuelans news and information from our television network, which they have relied on for 20 years.”

A bi-partisan group of U.S. congressmen recently pushed the White House to sanction Venezuela, whose socialist government is in shambles–its citizens are struggling to find food and daily necessities. On Monday, the Treasury Department levied sanctions on Venezuelan officials, including El Aissami. In a statement, the Treasury Department said El Aissami “facilitated shipments of narcotics from Venezuela, to include control over planes that leave from a Venezuelan air base, as well as control of drug routes through the ports in Venezuela.”

Under the sanctions, El Aissami’s American assets will be frozen, and U.S. companies are blocked from doing business with him. On Wednesday, embattled Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro decried the recent inflammatory actions stemming from CNN and the U.S. “CNN and the State Department are imposing on you a wrongheaded policy toward Venezuela,” Maduro  the Venezuelan people. “They are promoting a general and massive intervention, and aggression against Venezuela.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Venezuela Pulls Spanish-Language CNN After Investigative Report into VP appeared first on Law Street.

A Tuesday interview between CNN’s Jake Tapper and President Donald Trump’s right hand woman Kellyanne Conway turned into a heated discussion and continued the feud between the news organization and the White House. After the interview, Axios reported that a “source with direct knowledge” said that some in the Republican Party have been urging at least one conservative website to track down damaging information on Jake Tapper and publish “hit pieces” on him.

Trump and CNN have had a strained relationship for some time, and since Tapper is one of the channel’s top journalists, he is a pretty obvious target. But Tapper didn’t freak out about the threat. In fact, he seemed to take it pretty lightly.

So now we sit and wait to see which obedient attack dog follows orders. Arf arf!! https://t.co/GXBrHDblQp

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) February 8, 2017

He even posted some “compromising” information about himself to stall any coming attacks.

Cut a school assembly in May 1983 to see Return of the Jedi on its first day. #TapperDirtFile #JubJub pic.twitter.com/sbuXAzQBve

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) February 8, 2017

Maybe that wasn’t so bad, but what about this one?

@jaketapper how could you pic.twitter.com/sa9YpWlJAM

— Matthew D’Ambrosio™ (@drmattdambrosio) February 8, 2017

Other people soon followed and shared own their versions of a #TapperDirtFile.

I saw @jaketapper dump his fast food garbage ENTIRELY in the garbage bin, when he COULD have sorted SOME into recyclables! #tapperdirtfile

— Jacob M. (@RealLifeHoser) February 8, 2017

@jaketapper successfully lobbied against CNN’s 1 beard policy.

…Wolf Blitzer hasn’t spoken to him since #TapperDirtFile

— Jack Tweets (@jackTweets11) February 8, 2017

The interview that started this phenomenon had to do with Trump’s recent claim that the media doesn’t report on terror attacks. The White House released a list of 78 terrorist attacks that it believes the media didn’t cover enough. The list included some of the biggest terror attacks in recent years, which were obviously very well covered by the media.

“It’s offensive given the fact that CNN and other media organizations have reporters in danger right now in war zones covering ISIS,” Tapper said on Tuesday. “And I just don’t understand how the president can make an attack like that.” Conway replied that the list was just intended to increase awareness of the international threat of terrorism.

Tapper also questioned Conway about why the president hasn’t commented publicly or tweeted about the mosque attack by a white man in Quebec City that killed six people and wounded eight. The President had tweeted about the attack outside the Louvre in Paris, where no one was killed, but the attacker was Muslim. Conway replied that the president “doesn’t tweet about everything,” even though most of us think he could probably use a break from his smartphone.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Jake Tapper Tweets Dirt About Himself After Rumors that the GOP is Targeting Him appeared first on Law Street.

Twitter is riddled with parody accounts, but one in particular has been helping people laugh through their fears for the past week. The parody account “Future CNN” has been offering people a kind of respite from the craziness of the news–giving us a look into what the future may hold for CNN’s coverage.

The account tweets images of made-up future CNN chyrons that are as hilarious as they are jarringly accurate. The chyrons poke fun at Trump’s, shall we say, “impulsiveness,” CNN’s coverage/panels, and the general insanity we’ve seen in politics over the past couple of weeks.

The account first tweeted last Monday, and since then it has gained the attention of some prominent political reporters and actual CNN employees, including “Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter.

Here’s a sample of the account’s tweets:

pic.twitter.com/XirE9EIpvM

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) January 30, 2017

pic.twitter.com/SoemTPaRd8

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) January 31, 2017

pic.twitter.com/faTZIns0Vc

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 1, 2017

pic.twitter.com/BJ9JjrkRyx

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 3, 2017

pic.twitter.com/vwAAWwmcWT

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 3, 2017

pic.twitter.com/Nf3dMZEONV

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 7, 2017

It might be helpful to remind people that this is a parody account. Also, it is helpful to remind people that Twitter is free. And horrible. And also beautiful, but, you know, in a kind of horrible way.

You can follow “Future CNN” at @FutureCNN

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post “Future CNN” is Helping People Laugh Through Their Fears on Twitter appeared first on Law Street.

When Jim Acosta, CNN’s senior White House correspondent, tried to ask Donald Trump a question at his press conference last week, it didn’t end well.

Trump started the event by criticizing CNN for alleging that he has close ties to Russia and that U.S. intelligence agencies had briefed him about the possibility that Russia may have compromising information about him. Acosta then thought it would be fair if he, as a representative from the news outlet that Trump criticized, could ask a follow-up question. But Trump refused to answer, called CNN “fake news” and said, “your organization is terrible.” Acosta kept trying to ask a question but to no avail.

After the press conference, Acosta said that soon-to-be White House press secretary Sean Spicer approached him and warned that he would ban him from future press conferences if he repeated his “behavior.” Since then, Trump’s transition team has repeatedly demanded that Acosta and CNN apologize. On Sunday, Spicer said on Fox News, “The idea that he took no responsibility for his behavior was highly unacceptable and inappropriate, and he does owe us and his fellow members of the press corps an apology for his behavior.” After the press conference, Spicer and Acosta exchanged tweets.

Regardless of party, @acosta behavior was rude, inappropriate and disrespectful. He owes @realDonaldTrump and his colleagues an apology https://t.co/LnTkYam8IJ

— Sean Spicer (@seanspicer) January 12, 2017

I have covered 4 presidential campaigns. Democrats and Republicans. This has never happened. Let’s deescalate, find a way to work together. https://t.co/wgNsXlwt4z

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) January 12, 2017

Despite criticism from Trump’s team, Acosta has not apologized and CNN stands behind him–claiming that he was only doing his job. “Being persistent and asking tough questions is his job, and he has our complete support,” the network said in a statement on Monday. The statement went on to say:

As we have learned many times, just because Sean Spicer says something doesn’t make it true. Jim Acosta is a veteran reporter with the utmost integrity and extensive experience in covering both the White House and the President-elect.

Spicer and many in conservative media agree that Acosta was behaving inappropriately and want to keep him from entering future White House events. CNN and Acosta clearly disagree. Current White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said at the White House briefing the day after the conference that he had never felt the need or urge to toss a reporter out. “I can never recall a scenario in which I was tempted to throw somebody out of the room,” he said.

Earnest then seemed to imply that Spicer and the Trump team created the loaded atmosphere at the conference by starting it off by condemning Buzzfeed. He said, “there’s some pretty tough, even outrageous claims that were made. And so it’s not hard to see how that kind of environment is shaped by the people who organize the event.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Team Wants Apology from Jim Acosta, CNN Says No Way appeared first on Law Street.

AT&T’s $85.4 billion deal to buy Time Warner turned media consolidation into a campaign issue for both Democrats and Republicans this past weekend. 

The biggest deal of the year–announced just over two weeks before the November 8 U.S. election–received backlash from critics who believe the combination of AT&T’s millions of wireless and pay-television subscribers with Time Warner’s stable of TV networks and programming would reduce competition and hurt consumers.

Any merger would have to be reviewed and approved by federal antitrust regulators. The announcement caused a stir in Washington and led the candidates to criticize the status quo on antitrust and regulatory enforcement.

Donald Trump’s campaign has remained vocal about its distaste for the media and proposed merger did not sit well with the billionaire mogul.

“As an example of the power structure I’m fighting, AT&T is buying Time Warner and thus CNN, a deal we will not approve in my administration because it’s too much concentration of power in the hands of too few,” Trump said during a speech on Saturday.

The Republican candidate has been vocal about the “disgusting and corrupt” media. The campaign’s economic advisor Peter Navarro criticized the new media oligopolies for unduly influencing America’s political process.

“AT&T, the original and abusive ‘Ma Bell’ telephone monopoly, is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal because it concentrates too much power in the hands of the too and powerful few,” Navarro said in a statement on Sunday.

Trump said that if he is elected, he would look at breaking up the 2011 merger of Comcast and NBCUniversal. The Obama administration approved the merger with some restrictions in 2011.

Trump said of Comcast-NBCUniversal, “We’ll look at breaking that deal up, and other deals like that. This should never, ever have been approved in the first place.”

Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton hasn’t yet weighed in on the merger plan, but her running mate, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he shared “concerns and questions” raised by fellow Senator Al Franken, a Democrat representing Minnesota. Franken, a member of the antitrust subcommittee, said in a statement that huge media mergers “can lead to higher costs, fewer choices, and even worse service for consumers.”

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders joined the political opposition and urged the Obama administration to kill the deal. He tweeted:

The administration should kill the Time Warner-AT&T merger. This deal would mean higher prices and fewer choices for the American people.

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) October 23, 2016

Bryan White

Bryan is an editorial intern at Law Street Media from Stratford, NJ. He is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Broadcast Journalism. When he is not reading up on the news, you can find him curled up with an iced chai and a good book. Contact Bryan at BWhite@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The AT&T-Time Warner Deal Quickly Becomes a Campaign Issue appeared first on Law Street.

“Saturday Night Live” aired one of its most scathing hits against Donald Trump yet this weekend–but instead of going after the Republican frontrunner himself, it went after the people who support him. This weekend’s cold open featured cast member Cecily Strong as Scottie Nell Hughes, a conservative commentator who aggressively supports Trump. And while the spot features two of SNL’s most famous faces–in addition to Strong, Kate McKinnon plays CNN’s Kate Bolduan–it wasn’t that far off from some of the insane things that I’ve seen Trump supporters and spokespeople say on the air over the last few months.

Check out the SNL clip below:

McKinnon brings up multiple controversial statements regarding women made by Trump recently–including the fact that he brought up punishing women who have abortions during an interview last week. For each controversy that McKinnon brings up, Strong has a retort or explanation, each more ridiculous than the last.

Whether intentionally or not, SNL’s choice to feature Nell Hughes was foreshadowed by the pundit herself. As Gawker’s Melissa Cronin pointed out, Nell Hughes was talking about Trump supporters on CNN last month when she stated that they “have been abused, they have been slaughtered, they have been made fun of, on everything from the nightly news to ‘Saturday Night Live.'”

Nell Hughes reacted to Strong’s portrayal of her on CNN, saying that while she for the most part had a good laugh at it, after she had mulled it over, she found her portrayal a bit sexist.

She stated:

Talk about the ultimate shaming, the ultimate sexism. What does ‘SNL’ want me to do? Be barefoot and pregnant? Or maybe just talk about parenting issues? … Just because you don’t like the guy that I speak favorably of, then you know they’re obviously going to attack.

She also talked to the Blaze, and said that she was a little bit “shaken” and that “those who know me know that I’m actually a very insecure person. I read every tweet.”

SNL’s mocking of Nell Hughes was certainly specific, but not necessarily off base. As Slate points out, Nell Hughes has said some incredibly concerning things about Donald Trump, on various shows–making them fair game for SNL’s acidic parody.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post “SNL” Goes After Donald Trump Supporter Scottie Nell Hughes appeared first on Law Street.

The Republican field is about to have its fifth (but feels like 275th) debate of the 2016 primary season, hosted by CNN. Given that the field is still depressingly crowded, the last debate of 2015 promises to be a contentious one. Here’s a rundown of what you need to know before tomorrow night’s debate:

Participants:

It’s no secret that the Republican field has been so crowded this time around that we’ve needed two debate stages to hold them all. CNN is following the format of the first four debates, with a “JV” table consisting of Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham ,and former New York Gov. George Pataki.

The main debate will feature nine presidential hopefuls–according to CNN:

Businessman Donald Trump, the front-runner for the nomination, will again be center stage flanked by retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson on his right and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz on his left, CNN announced Sunday. The six remaining participants in the prime-time contest will be Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, businesswoman Carly Fiorina, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.

The moderator will be Wolf Blitzer, with CNN’s Chief Political Correspondent Dana Bash joining Salem Radio Network talk show host Hugh Hewitt as questioners.

Seating Arrangements

The podium arrangement, which places higher-polling candidates front and center, will look like this:

.@CNNPolitics releases lineup, podium arrangement for final GOP debate of 2015 https://t.co/flm7OnriN0pic.twitter.com/ke1uPuRo2s

— Allison Wisk (@allisonwisk) December 13, 2015

Where’s the debate?

It’s going to be held in Las Vegas, at the Venetian hotel. It’s hosted by CNN, so if you want to stream it from the comfort of your own living room while playing a drinking game (no judgment) check out CNN.com’s live stream.

Will there be any feuds?

Given that we’re getting closer and closer to primary votes–the Iowa caucuses will be held in February–candidates are starting to get a bit nastier with each other. For example, Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz–two of the frontrunners, are almost certain to attack each other, most likely on foreign affairs issues. Cruz is painting Rubio as a centrist who can’t be trusted, while Rubio’s gripe with Cruz is that he’s weak on security-adjacent concepts like surveillance.

We may also see some squabbles between Cruz and Donald Trump. Trump has gone after Cruz hard in recent days. On “Fox News Sunday” Trump called Cruz a “little bit of a maniac” when discussing his career in the Senate. Cruz’s response was surprisingly even-tempered, as he tweeted a reference to “Flashdance” at Donald Trump:

In honor of my friend @realDonaldTrump and good-hearted #Maniacs everywhere: https://t.co/KOPIi4XTVt

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) December 13, 2015

Whether or not Cruz will take the bait on the stage remains to be seen. 

What will they talk about?

Unlike the last few debates, tomorrow’s doesn’t have a specified theme. So, what the candidates will talk about could encompass a wide range of issues, but there are a few topics that it’s very safe to bet will be discussed. For starters, national security will be a hot topic. A lot has happened since the last debate on November 10, most visibly the horrific terrorist attack in Paris, France, that sparked conversations about the fight against ISIS, Syrian refugees, terrorism, and the status of Muslims in the United States. Additionally, the shooting in San Bernardino, California set many Americans even more on edge, leading to calls from Trump to stop allowing Muslims into the United States. Questions about gun control may also come up, as well as the economy and Planned Parenthood. 

Law Street readers: are there any topics you want to see discussed? Let us know the in the poll below:

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What Do You Want to Hear About in the Next Republican Debate? appeared first on Law Street.

MSNBC and CNN reporters, among others, just entered the apartment of Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, the alleged San Bernardino shooters, and rifled through their belongings on live TV. Not only is this a gross violation of ethics, it’s also a big problem for the police and FBI.

It’s unclear exactly what happened. According to the news networks, the landlord of the building where Farook and Malik lived allowed them in. According to the landlord, they all rushed past him without permission. The news crews then proceeded to look through the shooters’ personal possessions, showing things like friends’ photos and identifying documents to the cameras.

Screenshots from MSNBC. I added the redout pic.twitter.com/Ttu3zJ0Fjj

— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) December 4, 2015

MSNBC just doxed Rafia Farook, mother of a terrorist, on live television. I’ve blurred the important bits. pic.twitter.com/VqPwT60yVY

— David Boles (@DavidBoles) December 4, 2015

There are so, so many issues with what just happened that I don’t even know where to begin. For one, these news crews potentially just put the family, friends, and acquaintances of Farook and Malik in serious danger. By releasing things like pictures of drivers’ licenses and other personal information, they could be subject to violence. While I have no sympathy for the shooters, there’s no reason to endanger their families and friends, who may have absolutely no connection to the attacks.

Additionally, this is a big problem for law enforcement–the fact that they didn’t appear to have control over the crime scene is incredibly worrisome. The FBI appears to have had jurisdiction over the apartment at the time that the journalists entered. As CNN’s own panelists, legal analyst Paul Callan, and law enforcement analyst Jonathan Gilliam commented, the fact that the journalists were either allowed in, or not stopped by some form of law enforcement is a huge problem from a legal issue. Even if the two alleged shooters are dead, the scene still needed to be preserved in case they had accomplices, but it’s now been contaminated. Gilliam went so far as to call the incident: “the biggest visible screw-up in investigative history that I think has ever occurred.”

Apparently there were also other media outlets in the area, including FOX News, and at least one reporter from The Sunday Times, but it’s unclear who exactly was inside at any given time. Additionally, there were civilians mulling around–at one point it was reported that someone brought a child into the apartment, and another woman brought a dog.

Twitter users also broadcasted their outrage with CNN and MSNBC’s actions, as well as the lapse in security by law enforcement:

So FBI now investigating as terrorism. They’ll undoubtedly find some CNN and MSNBC fingerprints on the walls. Go get them, guys. — Sarah Kendzior (@sarahkendzior) December 4, 2015

Bang up job reporting from a crime scene by CNN & MSNBC. pic.twitter.com/kmwyMKIbCK

— Gord Macey (@GordMacey) December 4, 2015

Every reporter for @MSNBC, @CNN and other organizations that went in that apartment should be out of work before the day ends.

— Dan Jurgens (@thedanjurgens) December 4, 2015

Overall, it was a pretty shocking show of incompetence, from multiple different sources. Details on how this was allowed to happen was still unclear, but we should all expect some heads to roll.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Too Far: CNN and MSNBC Crews Rifle Through San Bernardino Shooters’ Apartment appeared first on Law Street.

Last night, CNN aired a documentary called “The Hunting Ground.” It’s posited as a film that delves into the systematic problem of sexual assault and rape on campus, and since it was first shown at the Sundance Film Festival in January of 2015, it’s been making waves. But in light of last night’s national airing, it may have just hit a seriously high-profile legal controversy. Tampa Bay Buccaneers QB Jameis Winston may be threatening to sue CNN for the documentary’s coverage of rape allegations against him when he was a student at Florida State University.

Jameis Winston played for Florida State University and won the Heisman trophy before being drafted by the Tampa Bay Buccaneers as a first round draft pick for the 2015 season. In December 2012, he allegedly raped another student named Erika Kinsman. While he was never charged, the investigation that followed was high profile, controversial, and messy. In fact, the New York Times claims that there was “virtually no investigation at all,” and also slammed Florida State for its handling of the allegations in a scathing investigation of the case.

Since the criminal portion of the case was put to rest, both Kinsman and Winston have sued each other. Kinsman sued Winston in April 2014 for the damage caused by the alleged assault, and he countersued her for defamation and other allegations the next month. Their suits have now been combined and will be heard in May 2017.

It’s within the context of this extensive legal back-and-forth, and Winston’s first NFL season, that “The Hunting Ground” is making headlines. The film features Kinsman talking about the alleged rape at FSU. Additionally, the film implies that Winston received preferential treatment during the investigation. Winston’s lawyers essentially threatened CNN with legal action if it actually showed the documentary. CNN’s Jeff Zucker received a letter that stated:

We are writing to formally caution CNN that the portions of the film ‘The Hunting Ground’ pertaining to Mr. Winston are false and defamatory to Mr. Winston. We urge CNN to reconsider the reckless decision to proceed with the broadcast of this deeply-flawed documentary in the face of the overwhelming evidence the film’s producers consciously and intentionally failed to adhere to any accepted journalistic standards.

“The Hunting Ground” has had plenty of other criticism levied against it–last week 19 Harvard professors (Harvard is one of the other schools featured in the documentary) claimed that the documentary distorted how it handled a sexual assault case.

Regardless of Winston’s threats, the documentary did air last night, so we’ll have to see if those threats of legal action were serious. And given the fact that not everyone seems happy with the documentary’s content and handling of certain cases, there may be more lawsuits down the road.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Jameis Winston May Sue CNN Over Campus Rape Documentary appeared first on Law Street.

A Florida newspaper is really pissed with Senator Marco Rubio.

In a scorching op-ed published Tuesday evening, the Sun Sentinel’s Editorial Board accused Rubio of “ripping off voters” with his constant absences in Congress. Rubio, who is currently seeking the Republican presidential nomination, has missed more votes than any other senator this year. The Sentinel blasted Rubio saying,

Your job is to represent Floridians in the Senate. Either do your job, Sen. Rubio, or resign it.

The op-ed comes in response to Rubio’s interview with CNN Sunday, where he justified missing roughly one third of Senate votes this year by saying, “I’m not missing votes because I’m on vacation. I’m running for president so that the votes they take in the Senate are actually meaningful again.” Rubio went on to explain,

If there is a vote where my vote is going to make a difference or an issue of major national significance and importance, we’d do everything possible to be there. But I am going to miss votes, I’m running for president…When I miss a vote, it’s not because I’m out playing golf. We’re out campaigning for the future of America where I believe I can make more of a difference as president than I could as a senator.

Watch Rubio’s CNN Interview Below

The Sentinel’s editorial board’s response:

Sorry, senator, but Floridians sent you to Washington to do a job. We’ve got serious problems with clogged highways, eroding beaches, flat Social Security checks and people who want to shut down the government.

If you hate your job, senator, follow the honorable lead of House Speaker John Boehner and resign it.

It got harsher when they wrote,

Let us elect someone who wants to be there and earn an honest dollar for an honest day’s work. Don’t leave us without one of our two representatives in the Senate for the next 15 months or so.

Then they accused him out for essentially defrauded tax payers with his salary saying,

You are paid $174,000 per year to represent us, to fight for us, to solve our problems. Plus you take a $10,000 federal subsidy — declined by some in the Senate — to participate in one of the Obamacare health plans, though you are a big critic of Obamacare.

You are ripping us off, senator.

And they do have a point. According to a tally by Politico, Senators Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders have been able to juggle both their senatorial duties and presidential campaigns, missing only seven and four votes respectively. Rubio on the other hand has shown an unmistakable unwillingness to help govern his state my missing staggering total of 59 votes. But to be fair Senators Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham aren’t too far behind him with absences from votes totaling 57 and 39.

Even though the Florida newspaper is hardly the first to point out Rubio’s poor attendance record, its critique probably stung the most. At a time when campaign debate rhetoric relies so heavily on politicians showboating and examples of how candidates were able to “revolutionize” their states with their policies, having constituents publicly rebuke a contender is a huge political blow.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Newspaper to Marco Rubio: “Do Your Job or Resign it” appeared first on Law Street.

Jim Webb, a former Virginia governor, was running for the Democratic nomination. Now he’s probably not. We should all feel overwhelmingly neutral about this.

Here are the facts you need to know: Webb was doing incredibly poorly–polling at about 1 percent. He did participate in the first Democratic debate, but the only two things that people appear to remember about his performance is that he kept complaining about not getting enough time to talk, and he had a vaguely uncomfortable answer about killing a man while fighting in Vietnam to the question “who is the enemy you’re most proud of?” Yesterday, the media was vaguely interested in the reports that he may drop out of the race and launch an Independent bid. But today, the buzz is that Webb is going to drop out of the race altogether and “mull his options.”

He’s expected to hold a press conference later today to explain his decision to the public. Whether anyone will watch who isn’t a political reporter or stuck in a doctor’s waiting room and can’t figure out how to change the station is unclear.

Webb is almost certain to rail against the Democratic party and the media for not supporting him–an argument he’s been making for a while. For example, he claimed the Democratic debate on CNN was rigged, saying: “It’s very difficult to win a debate when you don’t have the opportunity to speak the same amount of time on issues as the other two did.” He also criticized the DNC, for embracing Hillary Clinton and not aiding the other Democratic candidates.

In the end, this is sort of a shame. Webb is further right-center than the other Democratic candidates in the field. He should have been a legitimate candidate (at least more legitimate than the pretty insane Lincoln Chafee) who forced the leading candidates to talk about issues that may not have come up otherwise. Instead, he came across as uninteresting and whiny.

So, Jim Webb joins the “Scott Walker List of Candidates Who Didn’t Do Anything Interesting Until They Dropped Out.” Whether he eventually re-joins the race as a Independent is essentially irrelevant–he’s not going to suddenly inspire a wave of voters or donors by changing his party affiliation from D to I. So cheers to Jim Webb–the Democratic field is about to get a little less crowded, but honestly, it doesn’t really matter in the slightest.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Jim Webb Was Running for President, Probably Isn’t Anymore appeared first on Law Street.

Earlier this month the CNN/Multichoice Africa Journalists Awards were held in Nairobi, Kenya, featuring special guest Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta. Although his arrival was not so punctual, he made up for his tardiness by giving a “very frank” opening remark about how news in Africa is being reported by both local and international media.

Reporter for The Nation Nigeria, Lekan Otufodunrin, attended the event and commented on the African leader’s candor. “Expectedly, he lamented the emphasis on negative reports with not much attention being paid to some positive developments on the continent,” Otufodunrin recounted. Otufodunrin also discussed the obligation that African media forums have to share negative stories in addition to positive stories, to ensure that African leaders work hard to make a better standard of living for African citizens.

However, as Kenyatta noted, this multi-faceted obligation is not similarly shared by international media outlets, which consistently depict Africa as a dark hole, composed of corrupt leaders, violence, and general dysfunction. For example, this recent article by the Associated Press discusses the need for more food in southern Africa, reporting significant droughts and subsequent severe poverty. This article supports the idea that Africa is so dysfunctional that not only can it not support its people, but it can’t even address the issue at all. However, in contrast, Kenyatta pointed out that “child mortality rates fell by an average of forty percent in Africa in the period under review,” a fact that didn’t receive the same type of international recognition. By only consistently reporting on negative events, many international media outlets fail to highlight not only the growth that is happening in this part of the world, but the natural beauty and culture that is already established within the many different African nations.

“Why exaggerate African failure? Why ignore African success?” Kenyatta questioned. His questions are beyond valid. Why are stories of African growth and success so far and few between in international media? International media forums create a skewed perception of Africa to members of their audiences, which creates a domino effect perpetuating racism and violence rooted in ignorance.

International media also fails to differentiate the different countries in Africa, sometimes making it seem like Africa is just one country. For example, CNN recently published an article entitled “Mall the Merrier: Africa’s Growing Appetite for Shopping,” in which a cultural shift in capitalism in Africa is assumed to be the same in all African countries.  This dynamic established by international media takes away from what makes Africa such an incredible addition to the global community. Each African country has its own distinct culture and people, making the continent incredibly diverse. A change in the international media’s depiction of Africa is going to have to start on a national level, within African media forums. Once those media forums begin celebrating the success and growth within their country, it will influence a different depiction of Africa on an international level.

Kui Mwai

Kui Mwai is a junior at American University, studying Law and Literature. She is from Nairobi, Kenya. Contact Kui at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Reporting in Africa: President Uhuru Kenyatta Explains How We Can All Do Better appeared first on Law Street.

Last night was the first Democratic debate of the 2016 primary elections. Unlike the Republican field, which had to be split into two parts in order to accommodate the insanely large group, the Democrats have a small collection of political veterans vying for the nomination. There’s Hillary Clinton, the frontrunner; Bernie Sanders, the surprise challenger; Martin O’Malley, the other normal candidate that everyone keeps forgetting; Lincoln Chaffee, the weird metric system guy from Rhode Island; and Jim Webb, who probably exists.

In a lot of ways the Democratic debate felt a little flat, and a little too early. While there were some really great moments of legitimate and important discourse, the Democratic field is just a bit more subdued and unified on a lot of key issues than its Republican foil. But, that didn’t keep some funny, wtf, and badass moments from sticking out. In fact, here are the top five moments from last night’s Democratic debate.

Best Shot on Donald Trump: Martin O’Malley

Donald Trump, the inexplicable Republican frontrunner, received a pretty sharp jab from O’Malley, who called Trump “that carnival barker in the Republican party…”

Given the flashiness and “look-at-me” attitude that Trump has used to gain supporters, this classification isn’t that far off, and made a powerful point about his attitude toward immigrants.

Best One Word Answer: Hillary Clinton

It wasn’t surprising, but one of the biggest criticisms against Hillary Clinton to stick so far–the kerfuffle over her emails while she was Secretary of State–was a point of contention at last night’s debate. Lincoln Chaffee made a not-so-veiled reference to the email scandal, saying “I think we need somebody with the best and ethical standards as our next president. That’s how I feel.” Clinton was asked if she wanted to respond, and her answer was short, sweet, and made it clear she was tired of political grandstanding over the issue: “No.”

Second Most Uncomfortable Moment: Lincoln Chafee and Anderson Cooper

Cooper, who was by all accounts, a strong and fair moderator, went after Lincoln Chafee on his earliest Senate vote–the Glass-Steagall Act. Chafee gave a weird answer: it was his first vote after being appointed to his recently deceased father’s spot. Cooper followed up–asking if he wasn’t defending his vote because he was saying he didn’t understand what he was voting for. That led to really awkward exchange, that certainly could have been handled better by Chafee.

It also wasn’t the only moment where Chafee struggled to defend his record as a Senator–questions about his vote for the Patriot Act also seemingly tripped him up.

Most Uncomfortable Moment: Jim Webb’s Enemy

Jim Webb, who served during the Vietnam War, was asked what enemy he’s the most proud to have made. While his competition gave fun predictable answers such as Republicans and the NRA, Webb focused on his military experience, saying the enemy he’s most proud of making was “enemy soldier that threw the grenade that wounded me, but he’s not around right now to talk to.” While Webb was an incredibly impressive and heroic soldier, sans important context and with awkward delivery, the entire thing came across very strangely.

Best Moment Overall: Bernie Sanders and Clinton’s Emails

Sanders said exactly what we were all thinking the umpteenth time that Hillary’s emails came up last night: enough is enough. It’s time to talk about the real issues. And he was damn right.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 5 Moments From the First Democratic Debate appeared first on Law Street.

The second Republican primary debate of the year was aired last night by CNN and took place at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. It was a three hour debate that left me with more questions than answers–for example, did they really all go that entire stretch without having to use the bathroom? But, tradition dictates that we boil down those three hours into some gifable snapshots, so without further ado, check out the top ten moments from the second Republican debate.

10. Mike Huckabee Appealed to Millennials with a Reference from the ’80s

Mike Huckabee referred to the Republican field as the “A Team” and decided that Donald Trump was Mr. T, saying:

I think we are in fact The A-Team. We have some remarkable people. We even have our own Mr. T, who doesn’t mind saying about others, ‘you’re cool.’

Pop culture references are a great way to appeal to the masses–and if he had picked something less than 30 years old (we’re not counting the horrible 2010 remake) it might have been successful.

9. Marco Rubio Made a Fun Reference

One of Marco Rubio’s early introductions to the national stage was when he gave the Republican response to the State of the Union back in 2013. During the speech he took a fantastically awkward sip of water:

But last night, Rubio paid homage to that really awkward moment by bringing his own water to the debate. It was a sweet and dad-joke like, but I’m not sure how much of a splash it made.

We’re entering the next phase of the #GOPdebate. Anyone need refreshments? http://t.co/tdQhhyEBDb pic.twitter.com/ki3fr601BE

— Guardian US (@GuardianUS) September 17, 2015

8. Donald Trump Proves his Mature Rhetorical Mastery

Trump, on immigration: “First of all, I want to build a wall-a wall that works. We have a lot bad dudes, from outside, in this country.” So eloquently put, Trump, although I do have to admit “bad dudes” is a bit more PC than calling swarths of the population “rapists.”

7. Carly Fiorina Makes Things Up

Carly Fiorina went on a weird, grisly rant about Planned Parenthood that would have been strategically powerful if it was in any way true. She stated–presumably in reference to the much-edited Planned Parenthood hit videos created by the Center for Medical Progress:

I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes. Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.

The videos were disturbing to be sure, even though they were patently fiction. But at no point did those videos even come to close to portraying a fully formed fetus kicking its legs–Fiorina at this point was over-exaggerating exaggerations in an incredibly upsetting way. It’s one thing to be anti-choice, it’s another thing altogether to use lies and fear-mongering to prove your point.

6. Everyone Got Handsy with Donald Trump

Donald Trump was flanked on stage by Ben Carson and Jeb Bush, and at various points he exchanged really awkward high fives/handshakes with each of them. First was Ben Carson, who was very reluctant to get involved in the entire situation: But Jeb Bush got a little too enthusiastic, and actually appeared to make Trump flinch: 

Here you go Twitter pic.twitter.com/9wfzAQGftg — Brandon Wall (@Walldo) September 17, 2015

5. Winner of the Happy Hour Debate (Literally): Lindsey Graham

Lindsey Graham had my favorite quote of the earlier happy hour debate, which featured the candidates who aren’t polling well enough to make it to the main stage. Graham, who has his priorities in order, stated: “That’s the first thing I’m going to do as president. We’re going to drink more.”

He was referring to Ronald Reagan’s tradition of drinks with Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill, but it still makes for an awesome one-liner, and I wholeheartedly approve.

4. Chris Christie Gets Fed Up

Donald Trump and Carly Fiorina got into a spat back-and-forth about their business records, and Christie got really damn tired of listening to it. He eventually said:

 The fact is that we don’t want to hear about your careers. Back and forth and volleying back and forth about who did well and who did poorly. You’re both successful people. Congratulations. You know who is not successful? The middle class in this country who’s getting plowed over by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Let’s start talking about those issues tonight and stop this childish back and forth between the two of you.

While I’m normally not a Christie fan, and I don’t agree with the claims in his comment, here’s some well-deserved applause for shutting up that annoying Trump and Fiorina spat:

3. Jeb Bush Tries to Prove He’s a Cool Kid

Jeb Bush attempted to get some street cred in the lamest way possible–by admitting he had smoked  marijuana 40 years ago and his mom doesn’t approve:

So, 40 years ago, I smoked marijuana, and I admit it. I’m sure that other people might have done it and may not want to say it in front of 25 million people. My mom’s not happy that I just did.

 

2. Fiorina Takes Down Trump

You can watch this one yourself:

.@CarlyFiorina responds to @realDonaldTrump‘s comment about her face #CNNDebate http://t.co/jcEf6bW9ja #GOPDebate http://t.co/m0eDU5NvhT

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) September 17, 2015

Ok, now we actually do have a bad ass over here.

1. Some Really Lame Answers to the “Which Women You’d Put on the $10 Bill Question”

As a fun, easy question toward the end, the moderators asked each of the debaters “Which woman would you put on the $10 bill?” Some answers were fine–Susan B. Anthony,  Rosa Parks, Clara Barton, and Abigail Adams are all admirable American women. But some of them were flat-out ridiculous. For example, three of the candidates–Mike Huckabee, Donald Trump, and Ben Carson–all cited female family members. Huckabee chose his wife, Donald Trump chose his daughter, and Ben Carson named his mother. While those are nice answers and may have been good responses to “who inspires you,” they’re also total cop-outs and a bit insulting. Women have done so many great things for this country and none are included on our paper currency–yet three of the eleven candidates couldn’t even name one.

Then, Jeb Bush gave arguably the weirdest answer all night–put Margaret Thatcher on the $10 bill. Alright Jeb Bush, please do remember that if you want a fighting chance, some American women will have to vote for you. Although at this point, I haven’t the foggiest why we would.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 10 Moments from the Second Republican Debate appeared first on Law Street.

The second of what will be many Republican debates takes take place tonight at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. Following the “happy hour” debate at 6 pm, the 11 leading candidates will take the stage at 8 pm to debate foreign policy, domestic issues, and politics. In light of Donald Trump and Ben Carson’s recent popularity, many of the candidates have their work cut out for them. Here are five things that we can look for tonight:

1. It’s all about Trump

This may be obvious and/or very upsetting, but it’s true and will shape the way the other candidates conduct themselves tonight. Not only did Donald Trump survive the last debate, he has continued to gain ground since then. While many of his competitors initially dismissed him and his rising poll numbers, they now perceive him as a legitimate threat–attack ads have been launched and lead Republican donors are getting annoyed. In the first debate, most candidates simply thought he would implode or embarrass himself. But now, we can expect to see Trump’s challengers confront him directly.

Jeb Bush will have a chance to challenge Trump’s “low energy” claim (he’ll be standing next to him tonight), and Carly Fiorina will also want to get her fair share of shots in after Trump made pretty offensive comments about her appearance.

While it’ll certainly be interesting to see who gets into it with Trump, it will also be interesting to see which non-Trump candidates start a feud. We saw a small spat between Chris Christie and Rand Paul in the Cleveland debate, but seeing as the format this time around is set to encourage the candidates to talk to each other, this is something to watch.

2. Look For Tough Questions

Jake Tapper, CNN’s Chief Washington Correspondent, will moderate the debate along with Dana Bash, the network’s Chief Political Correspondent, and well-regarded conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt. Going into the debate all three moderators have expressed their interest in finding areas where the candidates disagree. Tapper recently told the New York Times, “My goal is more about: Let’s draw the contrasts between the candidates, and have them fight it out over these policies.” Viewers should also look out for some challenging questions from Hewitt, who recently gained some recognition for tripping up Donald Trump with detailed foreign policy questions.

While the Fox News debate forced many of the candidates to address challenging topics, this time around the moderators may be able to narrow in on their positions and how they differ from the rest of the pack. CNN has historically run into trouble with controversial debate questions, but if the moderators seek to push the candidates to address each other they may manage to avoid a similar fate while also sparking some controversy. While the format may help foster these arguments, it is also important to note that trying to keep 11 presidential candidates in line is no easy task.

3. Watch for Current Events

In addition to the conventional debate topics: the economy, foreign policy, and mainstream social issues, we can expect the candidates and the moderators to address some more recent developments. The events that the candidates choose to address will likely say a lot about their positions and what they stand for. We can expect Kentucky clerk Kim Davis to be referenced by Mike Huckabee and possibly Ted Cruz to try and leverage support from the party’s conservative base. Planned Parenthood will likely come up as well, especially while Ted Cruz is working to shut down the government in order to get rid of the organization’s federal funding. This could pose some issues for some candidates who want to avoid a shutdown but don’t want to appear as if they favor Planned Parenthood. We’ll have to see whether any of the moderators will force the issue.

4. Trump May Actually Win

In light of all of this, it’s pretty clear that most of the candidates are going to confront Trump and try and knock him down a bit. But we also know that previous attempts haven’t really worked. In fact, the more people talk about Trump, even when criticizing him, the better he seems to do in the polls. The other candidates may now find themselves at a crossroads in terms of how to respond. They can either try and attack Trump or even gang up on him, but that generally keeps fueling his media attention. On the other hand, they could try and stick out in their own right to get noticed without including Trump, but that could also lead to the candidates embarrassing themselves (i.e. Chris Christie calling for FedEx to keep track of immigrants).

5. Get Ready for Reagan

The debate is taking place in Reagan’s Presidential Library and the candidates will be standing directly in front of the 40th president’s Air Force One. Being a Republican debate, Reagan was bound to come up several times regardless of its location, but we can expect the candidates to lay it on strong at this one. Be sure to watch out for the ways that Reagan’s legacy is used and misused tonight.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Five Things to Look For in Tonight’s Republican Debate appeared first on Law Street.

It’s only May 2015 and already the Republican field vying for the 2016 presidential nomination feels awfully crowded. In anticipation of this very crowded field, various outlets that host the presidential debates are already taking steps to limit the number of candidates who will be able to participate in the nationally televised debates. Given the notoriety and celebrity status required to win the nomination in this day and age, this could sink some candidates’ campaigns before they even really begin.

In terms of candidates who have already declared, we have Senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio. There’s also former Governor Mike Huckabee, Dr. Ben Carson, and former HP CEO Carly Fiorina. It’s also speculated that some combination of former Governor Jeb Bush, former Governor Rick Perry, former Senator Rick Santorum, Governor Scott Walker, Senator Lindsey Graham, Governor Chris Christie, Governor Bobby Jindal, Governor John Kasich, and business mogul Donald Trump will declare at some point relatively soon. At my count that could be well over a dozen candidates, and I’m sure there are at least a few I’m missing or who will come out of the woodwork to declare.

In light of this potentially huge field, both Fox News and CNN, who are hosting debates in August and September, respectively, have declared that they’re only going to allow the top ten candidates on stage to duke it out for the GOP nomination.

Those announcements, of course, raised plenty of questions, because there’s no good way to determine who the “top ten” candidates are before a single vote is even cast. According to Fox News, the candidates have to “place in the top ten of an average of the five most recent national polls, as recognized by Fox News.” CNN has announced that it will be using a slightly different metric:

The first ten candidates—ranked from highest to lowest in polling order from an average of all qualifying polls released between July 16 and September 10 who satisfy the criteria requirements … will be invited to participate in ‘Segment B’ of the September 16, 2015 Republican Presidential Primary Debate.

Either way, Fox and CNN are both taking steps to ensure that the candidates that they allow on stage for the debates are ones who have a fighting chance–although when considering the crowdedness of the field, this may come down to a few percentage points between candidates who make the cut and those who don’t.

With that in mind, apparently CNN has also announced that it’ll give candidates who don’t make the cut for the main debate but who are polling about 1 percent in three national polls the opportunity to speak in a different segment of the September debate.

Given the sheer craziness that was trying to watch the Republican debates in 2012 and the Democratic debates in 2008, both of which had plenty of candidates (although less than 10), it makes sense that the news outlets want to limit the amount of candidates speaking. If they were to go above ten, there would be hardly enough time for each candidate to be able to say anything useful about his or her platform. That being said, missing out on national exposure will end up hurting the lesser-known candidates, and could end up culling the field on the earlier side than past election cycles.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post You’re Not Invited: Republican Candidates Vie for Debate Spots appeared first on Law Street.

With the end of the Colbert Report, so ended an era. Facebook and Twitter were full of people lamenting the end of Stephen Colbert and his late night character, saying things like, “Where am I going to get the news now?” and “Who can I trust to tell the truth once he’s gone?” Surely, it’s a good mix of people who understood the characters Colbert played and those who honestly felt like his show was reality. Where exactly are Americans getting their news, and what impact does it have?

When it comes to politics, Americans watch CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News more often than they watch traditional or local news. But what does it mean for the future of comedy news, news in general, and the way we react to it?

Where do we get our news?

Even at a time when television viewing numbers are falling due to an increase in streaming sites and a general lack of traditional watchers, most Americans get their news from television or television-backed news sites.  Pew Research Center analyzed Nielson data and its findings showed a lot about the television landscape, but even more about the people who watched it. These are the findings:

Almost three out of four U.S. adults (71 percent) watch local television news and 65 percent view network newscasts over the course of a month, according to Nielsen data from February 2013. While 38 percent of adults watch some cable news during the month, cable viewers—particularly the most engaged viewers—spend far more time with that platform than broadcast viewers do with local or network news.

While it is interesting to note how many people watch the news, it is more poignant to look at what news people watch, as simply watching news doesn’t mean too much in the age of bias and deep-pocketed politicians. Take a look at that study for a more in-depth view of what exactly people are watching.

Cable

Fox News

Fox News has been getting a great deal of negative publicity in the last few years, even more so than before with the growing popularity of internet memes and altered videos. As such, Fox News attracted an average of 264,000 primetime viewers in that key 25-54-year-old demographic, a number so low that the network hasn’t seen it since 2001. One of the biggest draws to the station is Bill O’Reilly, host of The O’Reilly Factor as well as an author, syndicated columnist, and political commentator. His audience remains at over 2.1 million viewers per episode, but once again, the number skews toward the older crowd.  Still, the Daily Kos points out that, “every Fox program in primetime dropped by double-digits, with Bill O’Reilly taking the deepest dive. Sean Hannity posted some of his lowest numbers ever in his new 10:00 pm time slot.” Things are not looking good for the company unless it can swing in some newer, fresher hosts and programming.

According to the Daily Mail, the average viewers at MSNBC and CNN are 60, and the average is 62-64 for the broadcast networks; however, the average viewer of Fox News is not quite the rich, white, Rush-Limbaugh loving man that the liberal bias would have many believe. In Frank Rich’s New York Magazine article, he paints a clearer picture of the typical Fox News viewer:

The million or so viewers who remain fiercely loyal to the network are not, for the most part, and as some liberals still imagine, naïve swing voters who stumble onto Fox News under the delusion it’s a bona fide news channel and then are brainwashed by Ailes’s talking points into becoming climate-change deniers. They arrive at the channel as proud, self-selected citizens of Fox Nation and are unlikely to defect from the channel or its politics until death do them part.

So what does watching Fox News say about you? You lean conservative, you are probably older, and you are typically from a middle-to-upper class household. Still, the station has an audience–maybe not entirely from that coveted advertising swath, but it has one, which is more than some other stations can boast.

CNN

If Fox News is drowning, CNN is already dead in the water when it comes to that key demographic, with only 99,000 viewers in the 25-54 sector in May 2014, according to Politico. Anderson Cooper 360 is still the top program on CNN with an average of 452,000 total viewers, and 145,000 in the key range.

The average CNN viewer, however, isn’t the type of person who will tune in for nightly news broadcasts or scheduled programming. Instead, it is becoming the go-to for hot topics and current events that interest people, such as the recent social justice protests, Ferguson special reports, Ebola, weather emergencies, and presidential addresses.

Still, the station has been doing some reshaping lately to help its numbers and push forward into the next era of broadcast. Brian Stetler explained:

Now, there is some overall shrinking going on. But the better word for what’s happening in media today is “reshaping.” Through layoffs, through cuts, through new investments, “reshaping” for the digital future that really feels more like the digital present. It’s already here. None of this context makes it any easier to say goodbye to our colleagues. In fact, it may make it even harder, because the fact of media, THE fact of media in 2014, is that reshaping of all kinds is going to continue.

So the viewership of CNN is changing, but it’s typical audience remains the same. Mostly liberal, younger but not too young, and transient people who don’t often sit and watch the news on a nightly basis. Still, take a walk around your local mall, sit at the dentist, or walk through an airport, and it is the station you are most likely to see.

MSNBC

MSNBC is one of the newer news channels, founded in 1996, and dedicated to broadcasting news programs 24 hours a day. It is owned by NBC Universal (82 percent) and Microsoft (18 percent), and its sister channels range from CNBC to The Weather Channel. What you see on MSNBC, however, is very different from what you see on the other stations.

One of the more famous programs, The Rachel Maddow Show, is seeing some pretty low ratings this season. The push now is to bring in younger viewers to round out the audience that is growing older fairly quickly. Still, it is considered the go-to network for those who consider themselves politically progressive.

MSNBC is constantly changing, more so than many of the other news stations. It works with viewers, though stays pretty close to its ideals, which many critics say lean too left. Some say that the network is setting itself up as the antithesis of Fox. Most recently, the network has taken a bit of a tumble in the ratings. According to the Huffington Post, MSNBC was down across the board, including declines in the key viewing demographic of nearly 20 percent, and president Phil Griffin vowed to make changes in 2015.

Still, shows like Morning Joe and Hardball with Chris Matthews finished ahead of their time slot competitors on CNN.

News Competitions

Another interesting revelation from Pew:

In one finding that may seem counterintuitive in an era of profound political polarization, significant portions of the Fox News and MSNBC audiences spend time watching both channels. More than a third (34%) of those who watch the liberal MSNBC in their homes also tune in to the conservative Fox News Channel. The reverse is true for roughly a quarter (28%) of Fox News viewers. Even larger proportions of Fox News and MSNBC viewers, roughly half, also spend time watching CNN, which tends to be more ideologically balanced in prime time.

So what does this viewing mean? Here are just a few more statistics from that study to keep in mind as we delve deeper into the individual stations:

• “More than one-quarter (28 percent) of the people who watch Fox News also tune in to MSNBC. An even higher number (34 percent) of MSNBC viewers turn on Fox News.”
• “There is even more crossover viewing when it comes to CNN. Slightly more than half (54 percent) of MSNBC viewers watch CNN, while 44 percent of Fox News viewers tune in to CNN. Healthy segments of the CNN audience also watch Fox News (39 percent) and MSNBC (38 percent).”
• “Overall, five percent of the adult American population watches both MSNBC and Fox News. That is slightly lower than the percentage that watches both CNN and Fox (8 percent) or CNN and MSNBC (also 8 percent).”
• “Despite some crossover, there are also viewers who watch only one of the three cable channels: Fox News Channel narrowly has the largest singularly dedicated audience. About one-quarter of American adults (24 percent) watch only Fox News, 23 percent watch only CNN and 15 percent watch only MSNBC.”

What about local news?

Local news, whether it is for a region or a smaller community, has also taken the backseat when it comes to key viewers. Airtime is a big factor in these problems–local news is often shown when people are coming home from work or sitting down to eat dinner. Fewer people are tuning into these broadcasts–even entertainment ones–choosing instead to watch reruns of other popular shows that air at the same time. Local news, as a rule, reports more on local activities and not just big political events, so those who are tuning in to see that information will go to bigger channels.

News Through Comedy: The Daily Show and Beyond

It may seem obvious that a “replacement” news source for Stephen Colbert would come from his “rival” and the person who preceded his time slot. In fact, he needs no introduction, as Jon Stewart is one of the most trusted faces in media, and his program, The Daily Show, is where Stephen Colbert got his start in the genre. His style takes a bit of getting used to, but give him a second chance before leaving Comedy Central. His ratings are higher than most of the other news outlets, and he does it all with a little bit of humor that “real” news stations cannot get away with. According to the Daily Mail, his show averages 2.3 million viewers per episode, putting him far ahead of others news outlets in not only viewers, but also in that 25-54 range. In fact, The Daily Show is consistently ranked the top late-night news show among the key demographic.

In 2012, a study even found that people who watch The Daily Show are more informed than people who watch Fox News. This could be because the face of The Daily Show isn’t the only person who reports on the show–there are a bevy of people who do humorous investigations. The Daily Show viewers tend also to be more educated, younger, and far more liberal than the audiences of other news sources.

There are other similar shows that have been picking up momentum lately. Most notably, Last Week with John Oliver on HBO has been breaking boundaries and bringing in more and more viewers. Of course, Oliver was a correspondent on The Daily Show, so his segments sometimes emulate Stewart’s, somewhat like Stephen Colbert’s did. In fact, Matthew Jacobs of the Huffington Post named Oliver’s program as 2014’s best television show, stating: “The year’s most surprising contribution to television is a show that bucked conventional formats, left us buzzing and paved the way for a burgeoning dynasty.” Gawker’s Jordan Sargent claimed Last Week Tonight is “the new Daily Show,“ while simultaneously criticizing The Daily Show for abandoning those “who have moved on from caring about Fox [News] and Republicans.”

So what can take the place of Stephen Colbert? Not much. When Stephen signed off, he wasn’t just leaving Comedy Central and satirical news behind, he was leaving behind a character that informed us while making us laugh. Time will only tell; so few thought that Jay Leno could be replaced, but his successor, Jimmy Fallon, has hit his stride to great success.

Conclusion

To get a well-rounded view of any political or social topic, it pays to do the research, find the facts from a variety of sources, and make your own decisions. Don’t shy away from Fox News, but also tune in to The Daily Show. The most important thing is that we consume news and current events through some medium. Sure, we have to understand the biases and we have to contemplate the “spin” on each story; however, it’s important to tune into news on television, as it is often the best way for us to visually learn about any given topic. How we receive our news has changed drastically, but now you can get it at the drop of a hat from many different sources.

Resources

Primary

Pew: How Americans Get TV at Home

Additional

New York Magazine: Stop Beating a Dead Fox

Daily Kos: Fox News Suffers Worst Ratings In Thirteen Years – And That’s Not Their Big Problem

CNN: Reshaping at Major Companies

The Wire: Fox Viewership is Getting Even Older

Politico: May Cable Ratings Spare No One

Media Bistro: October 2014 Ratings

Daily Mail: The average age of Fox News Viewers is 68 and a Majority of Them are Politically Conservative and White

Editor’s Note: This post has been revised to credit select information to Pew. 

Noel Diem

Law Street contributor Noel Diem is an editor and aspiring author based in Reading, Pennsylvania. She is an alum of Albright College where she studied English and Secondary Education. In her spare time she enjoys traveling, theater, fashion, and literature. Contact Noel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Comedy or Cable: Where Do Americans Get Their News? appeared first on Law Street.

Thursday night, President Obama announced an executive action that will protect millions of undocumented immigrants and restructure the United States’ priorities when it comes to immigration enforcement. And he used some fighting words. Obama stated:

The actions I’m taking are not only lawful, they’re the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican president and every Democratic president for the past half century. And to those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill.

Obama’s speech–just weeks after the Democrats basically got trounced in the midterms–was powerful, and regardless of how both his political allies and opponents are acting on the Hill, will make a real difference in the lives of millions of people who call America home.

But if you were interested in watching this speech, you may have had a hard time finding it. The big TV networks–ABC, NBC, FOX, and CBS–chose not to air the speech. Instead, CBS presented an episode of The Big Bang Theory; Fox network viewers saw Bones; and viewers tuning to NBC were able to enjoy The Biggest Loser: Glory Days.

While cable stations like Fox News, CNN, and Univision carried it, the big four networks chose not to and opted for their regular programming instead. That was their choice. When the President is giving an important speech, the White House can put in an official request that the speech be carried. In this case, the White House did not, apparently after hearing from networks that they weren’t too enthusiastic to postpone their normal programming. At one point, a supposed network insider called the speech too “overtly political.”

Obviously, this choice on the networks’ part wasn’t just about politics–it was about money. In today’s epoch of pretty predictable political apathy, you get more viewers when you show beloved shows like Shonda Rhimes’ Grey’s Anatomy than when you show the same President Obama speech on immigration that every other network has access to. And when you get more viewers your advertisers are happy. And then you make more money. It’s a pretty simple equation.

The story gets more complicated than that though. You see, stations like FOX, NBC, ABC, and CBS are national, but each place has their local affiliate that actually controls what that locale sees. That’s why I, living in D.C., can watch NBC but see a different morning news team than my parents living in Connecticut. There is some flexibility, apparently, because a few local affiliates gave a big middle finger up to their national stations, and showed the speech anyway. POLITICO found that:

A quick look at some major media markets found that the NBC affiliates in New York, Washington, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas and Phoenix; the ABC affiliates in Washington, Chicago, Boston and Kansas City; the Fox affiliates in Boston, Chicago, Dallas and Miami all aired the speech live. CBS affiliates were less likely to air the speech when it fell during the hit show “The Big Bang Theory,” though several of their affiliates outside the East Coast did air it live.

There seems to be fodder for an interesting internal struggle here–networks balked at the idea of showing Obama’s speech for presumably centrally financial reasons. But not everyone was willing to play ball, and the places where the speech ended up being shown are certainly illuminating. With a few exceptions, it seems like channels that showed the speech were in either more liberal areas, or areas like Dallas and Miami, known for larger immigrant populations. As strategic as the call was to not show the speech by big networks, the local stations took their own strategies into account.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Where Could You Watch Obama’s Speech? Depends Where you Live appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

We’ve all seen the news coverage about the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri. Not just the shooting, but also the aftermath that has turned a tiny town into a rioting disaster. Just in case you didn’t hear, Michael Brown was a young black man who was shot several times and killed on August 9 by a white police officer. But did you hear about the young man in Utah who was also shot and killed by a police officer? No? I’m not surprised. Twenty-year-old Dillon Taylor was shot to death by a black police officer two days after Michael Brown.

Where is the outcry filled with blinding rage in Utah that has filled the streets of Ferguson? Why have there been no reports of Dillon Taylor’s death, except a few small pieces found here and there on random news sites? No mention on CNN, MSNBC, or any well known 24-hour news station.

Dillon Taylor, described as white and Hispanic, was shot right outside of a 7-11 on August 11 by a black police officer. I hate to quote Rush Limbaugh because I’m not a huge fan of his, but he said it best on his radio show: “In the current climate in the United States, a black person can never be the oppressor, and a white person can never be a victim.” Truer words have never been spoken. I realize that history has shown that white people oppressed blacks and other races. But the same has happened to whites, obviously not in the same way and not as widely remembered, but everyone has been oppressed in some way at some point in history. Why is the life of this young black man more important the life of a young white and Hispanic man?

The biggest point I want to make is that both of these young men should have the same amount of coverage, but they don’t and it is all based on race double standards. If you take a step back and look at the context of both of these shootings you would realize that there is no real difference except the color of their skin and that of the police officers. When will people stop and think about the bigger picture, not everything should be about color. It is about right and wrong. And for that matter we don’t even know who is right and wrong until all of the facts are released and the police officers who did the shootings have been investigated.

—

Allison Dawson (@AllyD528) Born in Germany, raised in Mississippi and Texas. Graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University. Currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative.

Featured image courtesy of [DonkeyHotey via Flickr]

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Race Double Standards – It’s the American Way appeared first on Law Street.