Everybody knew that Vice President Kamala Harris was moving into unfriendly territory when she agreed to an interview on Fox Information earlier this week. However many, together with me, thought it was the appropriate factor to do, particularly as a result of I assumed the interviewer, Bret Baier, would deal with the interview with professionalism and journalistic integrity.
Seems, Harris not solely was strolling into unfriendly territory, it was downright hostile. Baier badgered Harris with Republican speaking factors, requested her powerful questions (which was truthful), and requested her some unreasonable questions (which was unfair).
However worst of all, Baier continuously interrupted Harris, chopping her off and infrequently speaking over her. A number of occasions, he put out his hand, virtually as a cease signal to sign that she wanted to cease, despite the fact that Harris was answering.
That was the quick response following Wednesday night time’s interview that numerous media shops described as “tense,” “confrontational,” “contentious” and “combative.”
The New York Times’ Michael M. Grynbaum wrote after the interview, “Vice President Kamala Harris could not get one other debate with former President Donald J. Trump, however on Wednesday, she obtained one with Bret Baier.”
Grynbaum added, “Mr. Baier’s aggressive demeanor was in keeping with the form of powerful protection of Ms. Harris that blankets Fox Information’s day by day programming.”
So, a day later and upon additional evaluate, what was the response? Just about the identical.
On Thursday’s “Morning Joe,” co-host Willie Geist mentioned, “It goes with out saying that Donald Trump wouldn’t be given the identical remedy, talked over, not allowed to complete these questions. It doesn’t imply the matters weren’t truthful. There was rather a lot in there that viewers needed to listen to from Kamala Harris. Why do you could have completely different positions now than you probably did in 2019? How are you going to repair the immigration disaster? All truthful, truthful questions. However Donald Trump clearly would by no means be handled that manner on Fox Information.”
Really, that’s true.
CNN’s Brian Stelter went back and compared Baier’s model whereas interviewing Harris and, final 12 months, Trump. Stelter famous that Trump was requested some powerful questions (and I bear in mind praising Baier on the time), however Stelter additionally wrote, “Baier was extra animated when questioning Harris, as if he knew that Fox’s conservative base needed to see her squirm in her seat. Total, Baier interrupted Harris at the least 38 occasions in 27 minutes, about twice as usually as Baier interjected with Trump (at the least 28 occasions in 36 minutes).”
Stelter also looked at Baier’s opening questions for Trump and Harris. The primary Trump query was a softball: “What do you assume is crucial challenge going through the nation proper now?” His first query of Harris was far more aggressive: “What number of unlawful immigrants would you estimate your administration has launched into the nation during the last three-and-a-half years?”
Stelter commented, “What a hanging distinction. With Trump, he warmed up his topic, tried to make Trump snug. With Harris, he went for the jugular straight away.”
“Morning Joe” co-host Mika Brzezinski actually blasted Baier, saying, “It was supposed to offer viewers a possibility to really hear her plans as president. As an alternative, as you noticed, it virtually instantly devolved into an embarrassing, bad-faith effort by a once-respected host to play to an viewers of 1. The host’s fixed impolite interruptions have been designed to distract from the problems and information that Trump and his acolytes attempt to twist and deform daily, and on Fox Information they attempt to keep away from. They usually couldn’t.”
Brzezinski added, “When Kamala Harris realized the host was not going to let her converse, the one manner the Vice President might give Fox viewers a possibility to listen to what she needed to say was to speak again over him. Was he ensuring that occurred? I personally assume completely. Did she do properly on this surroundings? In fact, she was nice. She’s a former prosecutor, lawyer basic, senator, present vice chairman. She’s high-quality with a scenario like that and even thrives. But there have been occasions she was shaky on solutions about immigration. He saved coming after her. However the questions gave the impression of they got here from a Trump marketing campaign advert. In actual fact, they performed a Trump marketing campaign advert within the interview.”
Talking on CNN, Stelter mentioned, “She basically walked right into a Trump marketing campaign area workplace as a result of anchor Bret Baier, who’s, you realize, a strong journalist, he’s additionally extremely sympathetic to Trump as a result of that’s what his followers need. That’s what his viewers need. His viewers need him to symbolize the Trump perspective. So, it was virtually as when you had a Trump surrogate interviewing Kamala Harris.”
Once more, let’s be clear right here. There may be nothing mistaken with powerful questions. However they have to be truthful and, most significantly, they have to be answered. And much too usually, Harris was not afforded the chance to reply them.
Stelter informed CNN host Kaitlan Collins, “Adversarial interviews are factor. We should always root for them. We should always need extra of them. You realize, you’re so unbelievable at adversarial interviews the place we problem newsmakers and we get the solutions out of them. However sure, this was a Rorschach take a look at. Some individuals assume Baier was mansplaining. Different individuals assume Harris was filibustering. I feel on the finish of the day, that is all about one phrase. The phrase ‘powerful.’ It confirmed that Harris was powerful. She went into the so-called Fox den, and that’s how Harris’s marketing campaign’s selling it.”
It’s true that Harris did appear to carry her personal all through the interview. And, as quickly because it was over, Baier defended his interview whereas his Fox Information colleagues patted him on the again. Try this insightful conversation from The Washington Publish’s Erik Wemple, Chris Suellentrop, politics editor for Publish Opinions, and Slate’s Josh Levin, host of the podcast “Sluggish Burn: The Rise of Fox Information.”
Levin famous, “It’s humorous that he instantly went into the spin room and Harris left.”
Suellentrop mentioned, “Baier closed his present by complaining that he didn’t get to ask all his questions. This feels just like the reverse of when a politician complains concerning the debate moderators. I don’t assume a journalist can lose an interview. If his aim was to butter up a number of of these Fox Information superfans by a ritual show of toughness, I can see why he was dissatisfied.”
In all equity, I ought to embrace one one that had excessive reward for Baier and his interview with Harris: Donald Trump. The previous president posted a long message on social media that began with, “Nice job by Bret Baier in his Interview with Lyin’ Kamala Harris.” He added, “Once more, congratulations to Bret Baier on a troublesome however very reasonable interview, one which clearly confirmed how completely incompetent Kamala is.”
So, yeah, at the least one individual thought Baier did job. You need to ask: Is that the one opinion Baier and Fox Information cared essentially the most about?
Fox Information drew sturdy viewership numbers for the Harris interview. The community introduced that 7.8 million viewers tuned in, in keeping with Nielsen Media Analysis. That made it the most-watched TV interview that Harris has completed this marketing campaign.
Harris’ first unique interview, which included working mate Tim Walz, on CNN with Dana Bash drew 6.3 million viewers. Harris’ latest interview on “60 Minutes” had 5.7 million viewers. And Harris’ interview with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle had 1.8 million viewers.
As well as, “The View” had 3.1 million viewers for its present with Harris, and 2.9 million tuned in to look at her look on CBS’s “The Late Present with Stephen Colbert.”
Episode three of The Poynter Report Podcast drops on Monday and it’s my interview with Steve Kornacki, the nationwide political correspondent for NBC Information and MSNBC.
You realize him this time of 12 months, breaking down elections along with his rolled-up sleeves and khaki pants and his notes rolled up in his arms.
We speak about how we should always have a look at polling earlier than the election, how Kamala Harris’ late entry into the race impacted his job, and which state might get attention-grabbing on election night time.
I’ll have extra in Monday’s e-newsletter, however you’ll want to hearken to the podcast when it drops subsequent week. And, when you get an opportunity, give it ranking and a evaluate — it actually helps us proceed bringing in nice company to speak concerning the media.
Former NBC and MSNBC anchor Brian Williams in New York Metropolis on Tuesday. (Charles Sykes/Invision/AP)
The streaming service Amazon Prime Video may have dwell information protection on Election Day and a well-recognized face shall be within the anchor chair.
Former “NBC Nightly Information” anchor Brian Williams will anchor Amazon’s election protection beginning at 5 p.m. on Nov. 5.
In a press release, Williams mentioned, “After 41 years within the enterprise — from native information to community reveals to cable information — this looks like the following large factor. And the worldwide market of Amazon is a pure residence for this first-of-its-kind enterprise. Collectively we’ll observe the storyline on election night time wherever it leads us.”
Williams stays a revered identify in broadcast journalism. He was the anchor of “Nightly Information” from 2004 to 2015 till he was pressured out for having embellished his experiences protecting the Iraq Warfare. However he ultimately labored his manner again to host his personal nightly present on MSNBC.
Then, in 2021 on the age of 62, Williams walked away from that job. Most anticipated he would ultimately return elsewhere, however he has laid low till this Amazon announcement.
For now, this can be a one-night-only information occasion from Amazon. However might this result in extra information protection?
The New York Times’ Nicole Sperling wrote, “Mr. Williams’ present shall be seen as a take a look at case to find out the streaming large’s curiosity in dwell information. The corporate has spent the previous few months increasing its choices of dwell sports activities. The corporate has had the rights to the NFL’s ‘Thursday Night time Soccer’ and just lately paid $1.8 billion for the rights to a slew of NBA video games.”
Nevertheless, Variety’s Brian Steinberg wrote, “Individuals conversant in the matter have cautioned towards viewing the Williams undertaking as an indication that Amazon intends to start out producing information programming frequently. And but, the digital large does appear to be dipping its toes into the format after spending months constructing a presence in sports activities that features the NFL’s ‘Thursday Night time Soccer,’ and, quickly, common NBA telecasts.”
In the meantime, The Wall Street Journal’s Gareth Vipers wrote, “The election particular shouldn’t be seen as an indication that Amazon is now seeking to have a daily presence in unique information content material, The Wall Avenue Journal beforehand reported.”
So far as the election night time particular, Williams received’t be doing it alone. He shall be joined by pundits and information analysts. A few of these names needs to be introduced shortly.
The present is predicted to depend on election outcomes from one other occasion, resembling The Related Press and/or Reuters.
I needed to name your consideration to the latest NPR Public Editor column from my Poynter colleagues. Kelly McBride writes about NPR protecting fears of a fraudulent election.
However I additionally needed to direct you to the second half of the column the place Poynter’s Nicole Slaughter Graham writes, “What function does public media play throughout a public security disaster?” It’s particularly concerning the job WUSF in Tampa did earlier than, throughout and after two hurricanes hit Florida in a span of lower than two weeks.
WUSF information director Mary Shedden informed Graham one thing attention-grabbing: that the station turned down interviews with native political candidates.
Shedden mentioned, “We’re really avoiding individuals working for workplace if in any respect attainable, fairly actually as a result of there may be, I imply, we’re so near an election. There’s a political spin angle to loads of what’s occurring from each side.”
Shedden added that’s not what the neighborhood wants proper now.
And now for extra media information, tidbits and attention-grabbing hyperlinks in your weekend evaluate …
Have suggestions or a tip? E mail Poynter senior media author Tom Jones at [email protected].
The Poynter Report is our day by day media e-newsletter. To have it delivered to your inbox Monday-Friday, enroll here.
