Meanwhile, over at CNBC, the network has been upholding all the highest standards of the cable news business by trying to portray Rick Santelli’s idiotic rant against the Obama administration’s plan to limit the massive damage of the mortgage crisis as a great moment in American journalism. At least over at sister network MSNBC, Chris Mathews correctly identified the CNBC correspondent’s claptrap as the “Ebenzer Scrooge–Rick Santelli position”—and got the CNBC reporter to admit that he was a John McCain supporter.
All this led Mark Ames and Yasha Levine to speculate at playboy.com that Santelli’s fifteen minutes were actually part of a right-wing Republican disinformation campaign to undermine Obama’s efforts to rescue the economy. Asked about this charge by FCP, CNBC spokesman Brian Steel sent an e-mail saying, “Rick Santelli’s comment clearly struck a nerve among a large portion of American citizens and sparked a debate which is something Rick has done for more than a decade as a commentator on CNBC. To try to make anything more of his comment than that is ridiculous and without basis in fact.”
FCP e-mailed back, “On the record: was he asked by his bosses if he was part of a larger organized effort? What “news” purpose was served by repeating this rant over and over again on CNBC, and promoting him (and it) on the Today Show?”
“We don’t comment on internal CNBC discussions,” Steel replied. Then, although FCP had specified that it was only interested in an on-the-record response, he added: “Off the record it strikes me that my first answer is unquivocal [sic] and should answer all your questions. Also off the record I am curious as to why CJR has written about it at least three times particularly since each time your readers via the comments section of your website have overwhelming disgreed [sic] with your views. It seems as if you are both tone deaf and hypocritcal [sic].”
So much for asking follow-up questions in the world of cable news.
Would you champion the notion that Chris Matthews should clarify the voting record of anyone who criticizes the Administration's policy?
Perhaps Matthews, himself, should run an "I voted for Obama" disclaimer at the start of each episode of Hardball?
Perhaps you should attach one to your column as well.
#1 Posted by Cecelia, CJR on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 08:38 AM
Chucky ol pal, I gotta say, you really nailed that scoop Playboy had. And what a scoop it was, so "sccopworthy" that they had to retract it almost as soon as it went up.
Why do you suppose that is (hint hint I smell a lot of unsubstantiated bull).
Regardless of how bad it was, it still found a home at a respected journalism school.
#2 Posted by Bill Gervas, CJR on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 08:55 AM
Using your moronic logic, if Mr Santelli being a mccain supporter makes any question he raises about any Obama policy irrelevant than Barney Frank and Chris Dodd NEVER get to question any financial policy EVER again after their FABULOUS oversight and direction with Fannie and Freddie (and OH SO MANY MORE blunders). Or any democrat who voted for the War in Iraq cant even question the approach or policy - is that the way you would have it?
Stop with the political slants being more important than the issues. Santelli's questions and or points are what need to be vetted - Why doesn't the administration/government just address his points - If they were correct or had truly VALID counterpoints his rant would be quelled.
#3 Posted by richa, CJR on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 09:47 AM
Shorter Brian Steel: "Astroturfing? Who, US?" Snort. What a joke.
#4 Posted by Southern Beale, CJR on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 10:13 AM
Total orchestrated Right Wing hit job that flopped miserably, despite the media continuing to beat the drum for Santelli's idiocy and failed tea party's. This guy Brian Steel, incidentally, is incompetent and should be fired immediately. What a stupid, arrogant, deluded, detached jerk.
#5 Posted by Once a great reporter, now a PR flack, CJR on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 11:41 AM
CNBC is a joke. All those strutting corporate pimps, now whining and sniveling. Besides being unwilling to tell thetruth, they're displaying a couple of other traits of drug addicts: Slow learning, quick forgetting
#6 Posted by Mickey Finn, CJR on Wed 4 Mar 2009 at 05:25 PM
As always, you've caught the details that clarify the issues. It's as if I have someone who does my homework for me.
#7 Posted by Burke, CJR on Thu 5 Mar 2009 at 06:34 PM
"So much for asking follow-up questions in the world of cable news."
To your credit, Mr. Kaiser, you DID ask follow-up questions and the response was interesting and important, if not informative. Good on you for not being bullied into anonymous quoting, and for refusing to honor the one-sided "off-the-record" demand. That's the way real journalism should be done.
#8 Posted by George Sand, CJR on Sat 7 Mar 2009 at 10:40 AM