In the Aftermath of Its Greatest Triumph, CNN Finds Mostly Criticism

The press releases coming from CNN yesterday were almost giddy: Wednesday's Republican CNN/YouTube debate imn St. Petersburg drew 4.49-million viewers, making it the most-watched primary presidential debate in history. Before that, CNN's Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas Nov. 15 was the most-watched primary debate in history, drawing 4-million viewers.

But all that success seemed beside the point Thursday, as the cable newschannel drowned in criticism from both sides of the political spectrum. See my story with Wes Allison in today's paper for the blow by blow.

Republican bloggers and pundits were criticizing CNN for allowing a spotlight moment for a gay retired general who turned out to have ties to both Hillary Clinton and John Kerry. The appearance by Keith Kerr, a well-known advocate for rescinding the ban against gays in the military, triggered a microscopic scrutiny of every questioner by right wing bloggers such as Michelle Malkin, Redstate.com and Newsbusters.org.

Liberals, on the other hand, criticized CNN for initially promising to insulate the Republican debate from questions posed by Democrats, though they made no such public promises to Democrats for their debate.

In response, CNN offered a defense that couldn't explain away two key problems: political director Sam Feist told me yesterday the cable channel focused on the questions, not the questioners, refusing to "provide a ideological litmus test" to everyone who submitted a question.

But if the background of the questioners doesn't matter, why did CNN debate chief David Bohrman apologize for using Kerr and say they wouldn't have aired his question had they knew of his Democratic political ties? And since they figured out the final 60 to 70 possible questions for air in the 24 hours before the debate, how could CNN have possibly vetted all those questioners for significant ties to Democratic campaigns?

Unfortunately, as much as CNN officials bragged about making a Republican debate for Republicans, with questions submitted by average people, their question selection process made it impossible to keep out hidden activists. But I doubt anyone would have noticed, if they hadn't handed a signature spotlight moment to a questioner who they hadn't vetted much at all.

And even though some liberal bloggers are saying the political background of questioners shouldn't matter, I have a hard time believing they would have tolerated seeing Hillary Clinton asked a tough question on an issue important to conservatives by someone with hidden ties to Rudolph Giuliani or George W. Bush.

It's an ironic turn, given that so much initial concern about the CNN/YouTube debates centered on whether the questions would be good enough. Turns out, we all should have been playing closer attention to who was asking the questions -- especially CNN.

See all the YouTube clips of the 34 questions asked Wednesday by clicking here.

Here's the three different statements CNN released Thursday:

STATEMENT 1

"The whole point of these ground-breaking CNN/YouTube debates is to focus on substantive questions of concern to real people and to throw open the process to a wider range of Americans all around the country. CNN cared about what you asked, not who you were. This was the case for both the Democratic and the Republican CNN/YouTube debates.

"The issues raised during last night’s debate were legitimate and relevant no matter who was asking the questions. The vested interests who are challenging the credibility of the questioners are trying to distract voters from the substantive issues they care most about. Americans are tired of that discredited low-road approach, and throughout this election campaign CNN will stay focused on what the candidates are saying about the pressing issues facing this country at a critical time in our history. Judging by the fact that last night's event was the most-watched primary debate ever, it seems that the audience responded to our focus on plain-spoken questions about important issues."

STATEMENT 2

“When choosing among the 5,000-or-so questions, CNN considered factors such as length, video quality and whether the question would help Republican primary voters select their presidential nominee. We sought a variety of questions on a variety of topics. We also sought to eliminate anyone with a direct role in a campaign and with one unfortunate exception, which we regret and have fully explained, we accomplished that.”—CNN political director Sam Feist

STATEMENT 3

Following the debate, CNN learned that retired brigadier general Keith Kerr served on Clinton's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender steering committee.

CNN Senior Vice President and Executive Producer of the debate, David Bohrman, says, "We regret this incident. CNN would not have used the General's question had we known that he was connected to any presidential candidate."

Prior to the debate, CNN had verified his military background and that he had not contributed any money to any presidential candidate.

Following the debate, Kerr told CNN that he's done no work for the Clinton campaign. He says he is a member of the Log Cabin Republicans and was representing no one other than himself.
 

Surprise Loser in YouTube Debate: Anderson Cooper

I'm not sure who actually won tonight's CNN/YouTube debate -- distinguished mostly by the top candidates dancing around a series of surprisingly astute questions fielded from the public through the video sharing Web site.

But I know who lost: Host Anderson Cooper.

Clearly overmatched and a little surprised by the increased squabbling among the candidates, Cooper lost control of the debate too many times -- allowing candidates to eat up time with long stretches of one-on-one arguments, and refusing to call out politicians when they avoided answering the questions asked.

For example, one YouTuber faced the camera and said "The death penalty: What would Jesus do?" And even though Mike Huckabee spent long minutes recounting how he debated handing out  death sentence as Governor of Arkansas, he never got to Jesus' part. When Cooper pressed him to answer the question, he said cracked: "Jesus was too smart to run for public office." Answer over.

When Fred Thompson provided a YouTube-style campaign video for CNN which used past clips of Mitt Romney defending abortion and Huckabee appearing to agree to raise taxes, Cooper asked about the attack by saying "Senator Thompson -- What's up with that?" (Thompson looked a little embarrassed before cracking "I just wanted to give my buddies a little more air time.")

The candidates weren't directly confronted about their inability to answer some questions until Cooper turned to Brigadier Gen. Keith Kerr, a retired military man sitting in the audience who castigated the candidates for failing to answer his question about whether they think the American military isn't professional enough to work alongside openly gay people.

Unfortunately, Kerr turned a rebuke for non-answers into a speech about his own story of coming out after leaving military service and the continuing discrimination against gay people in the armed forces. It was another example of how Cooper let an element of the show spin out of CNN's control, violating the channel's own goal of weeding out "gotcha" questions posed by Democrats to embarrass all the candidates.

(Now Republican bloggers and Fox News are reporting that Kerr was a member of a steering committee of gay supporters for Hillary Clinton; Cooper said during his show, Anderson Cooper 360, that CNN would not have used his question if they knew this allegation was true).

Every candidate dropped at least one doozy of a statement: Huckabee wants to eliminate the IRS and rely on retail sales taxes to run the government (he should ask Florida how well that works); Ron Paul wants to eliminate the departments of Energy and Education; John McCain blamed the American people's homefront reactions for losing the Vietnam War while Fred Thompson said overturning the abortion law Roe vs. Wade should be America's "number One priority" and Romney advocated denying the children of illegal immigrants the most basic health and education services.

The America advocated by this bunch sounded like a mean-spirited, paranoid place, where politicians are more comfortable pledging to kick the children of illegal immigrants out of the country than pledging to take on government subsidies handed to big farming companies. (One upsetting moment for me: Duncan Hunter telling the American people to buy American while Christmas shopping when American retailers such as Wal-Mart are stocked to the gills with cheap goods made in China, Korea and Vietnam. Is he going to insist they buy American this Christmas, too?)

Cooper aside, Romney came out the biggest loser here. At turns too slick and too halting, he managed to reinforce his image as a flip-flopper and an overly programmed candidate. McCain sat above much of the infighting like a wise Yoda -- particularly on the issue of waterboarding military prisoners -- but can't get past his support for immigration reform and a still-unpopular war. Thompson showed more life and knowledge of the issues, but offered few new ideas, leaving Huckabee in a great position as the most reasonable, human-sounding candidate who wasn't really attacked very badly during the debate.

My next post will talk a bit about the backstage stuff, including info on the "spin room," where celebrities such as action star Chuck Norris and former Senator George "Macaca" Allen were spinning journalists on the debate's outcome.

Here's the acoustic ballad which kicked off the debate:

       

   

Countdown to CNN/YouTube Debate: Media Madness Comes to St. Petersburg

I can't tell you for sure whether Billiam, the snowman concerned about global warming in the first CNN/YouTube debate, will make an appearance at tomorrow's reprise here in St. Petersburg.

But I can tell you who won't be appearing: Gov. Charlie Crist.

"I can break the rules and tell you we will not be using the governor's question," said David Bohrman, the CNN executive in charge of the debate, during a walk-through of the debate hall with local and national media a couple of hours ago. "Governors have access to these candidates already. We got lots of questions submitted by celebrities and someone well known. We wanted to showcase questions from the people."

Here's Crist question; judge for yourself whether it was worthy of inclusion:

The Mahaffey Theater has the feel of a giant TV studio set, tricked out with an array of lights, teleprompters and camera positions. At stage right, a huge, 25-foot wide definition video screen proudly displayed the event's logo; on Wednesday, that screen will feature each of the 40 or so questions expected to form the meat of tomorrow night's debate.

Host Anderson Cooper hadn't arrived yet.  Flying in from Los Angeles tonight, he was expected to huddle with producers and winnow down the final group of questions to 60 or 70 potentials. Looking at the grand display, including a wide backdrop incorporating the logos of CNN, YouTube, Progress energy and Republican Party of Florida, one local TV reporter wondered how much it all cost.

Bohrman, a big bear of man who sounds like an old hand on the eve of his second YouTube-affiliated debate, handed the assembled media deftly. No, there will be no "gotcha" questions submitted by those who seem to be from the Democratic side of the issues. Yes, the feel of the nearly 5,000 questions submitted is different than the 3,000 or so submitted for the Democrats.

Fun facts: Kirk Douglas submitted a question ("No one even flagged it for us," said Bohrman, who noted somebody stumbled on it while sorting through questions.) Democratic candidates Chris Dodd and Dennis Kucinich submitted queries, too (don't expect to see them on camera, tomorrow).

And some publicists were buzzing over news that action movie star Chuck Norris was expected to stand in a corner of the Mahaffey lobby reserved as "the spin room" -- where flacks for each candidate provide soundbites to the assembled press -- in support of Mike Huckabee (What's his campaign slogan? "Vote for me or Chuck Norris will kick your ass?")

The buzz was heady enough that Bohrman wasn't even bothered that ABC News and Facebook tried to steal a bit of their thunder, announcing Monday that they would present to back-to-back debates in New Hampshire days before the primary there.

"It's about time somebody followed us," he said, noting that it remained unclear how Facebook users would impact the actual debate. "This is a radical though here -- every question comes from YouTube. I don't think we'll see another presidential cycle where there's no public participation in a debate." 

Check out Huckabee's commercial featuring the Chuckster. If his policies weren't so awful,I'd crossparty lines to vote for him....

Anderson Cooper Sells the CNN/YouTube Debate

Like all good anchors, Anderson Cooper is a pretty good salesman when he wants to be.

And when we talked on the afternoon before CNN's last Democratic debate in Las Vegas Nov. 15, what Cooper was selling was the notion that Wednesday's GOP debate in St. Petersburg featuring questions submitted by the public on YouTube was as user-friendly as it could be. In other words, CNN wasn't going to let the Internet community choose which questions the candidates would answer.

"There was criticism that all the questions should have been voted by people online, and I think all of us wish that would be possible," said Cooper, speaking by cellphone. "It’s frankly just technically not possible because you would have campaigns basically stacking the deck, trying to … I mean, you don’t have an online voting system which at this point can fairly judge that kind of thing. You would have campaigns completely stacking the deck to try to get the questions they want asked to their candidate. And we already saw attempts at that in terms of campaigns getting particular … trying to get people to ask particular questions. We kind of pointed that out and made fun of it a little bit in the debate the first time."

Cooper makes a valid point that naysayers of this debate have had a hard time refuting. David Bohrman, CNN's Washington bureau chief and executive in charge of organizing the cable newschannel's debates, has already said many times this debate's questions will focus on intra-party issues, as opposed to grilling them on a controversial stance which every candidate accepts, like,say, gay marriage.

So CNN is choosing the debate questions from some 4,000 submitted up to yesterday's deadline -- including some solicited and filmed by the St. Petersburg Times -- and Cooper promises to try and make them better-looking and just as odd as the Democrats' lineup back in July. I asked Coop a few questions about what we might see, and since the paper only ran a small slice of our conversation on the front page today, here's a longer, but still heavily edited version of our exchange: 

Will Fred Thompson's Unorthodox Media Strategy Pay Off?

Years ago, I remember hearing from our then-political editor about an unusual tactic presidential candidate George W. Bush was trying in his first run at the job -- scheduling interviews with local TV stations to avoid the seasoned national press and speak more directly to voters.

  I was reminded of that neat bit of media jujitsu while checking out Fred Thompson's long-delayed announcement that he's getting into this presidential race -- delivered, appropriately enough for an ex-actor, on the showbiz forum of least resistance, Jay Leno's Tonight Show.

When did the sophomoric Leno become the place where Hollywood-friendly pols reveal their ambitions? Like Schwarzenegger before him, Thompson was able to sidestep the crowd of Republicans gathered for yet another debate in New Hampshire with his own series of controlled, marginally hip announcements which played to his strengths while giving him the center stage.

"For those who talk about that New Hampshire situation...it's a lot more difficult to get on the Tonight Show than it is to get in any presidential debate," Thompson cracked to Leno, sounding more like a Left Coast insider than the plain-folks politician he's playing on the stump.

His Tonight Show flyby -- where the toughest test he faced was pretending the fake campaign bumpers stickers Leno cooked up as a visual gag were actually funny -- was only the beginning. Thompson also released a windy announcement on his Web site and ran an ad during last night's Republican debate.

Such stunts drive the traditional campaigners and political press crazy; it feels like cutting in line to get a concert ticket everyone else waited days to buy. But last night's media trifecta gave him exposure without the possibility of a gaffe or unexpected questions -- manna from heaven for a politician.

I'm not with those who think Thompson's getting in too late or looking lazy. Just because political hacks have been knocking themselves out for more than a year on this campaign, that doesn't mean the American people have spent much effort on it. They are only now starting to pay serious attention, and Thompson timed his announcement to capitalize on all trends: avoiding serious and stringent questions for as long as possible, only to enter the race at a time when people are finally starting to take a look, when he needs to start raising money.

Indeed, Thompson's only problem may be himself. Even on Leno, a forum he owned indisputably, the former senator looked a bit tired and lethargic. If you look unenthusiastic and reluctant when you're getting pitched the slowest softballs in the park, how are you going to look on a stage surrounded by  eight other red tie-wearing, balding white guys who love Ronald Reagan?  (he was, however, energetic enough to date country singer Lorrie Morgan, left)

Thompson may be the next Republican actor to walk in Reagan's shoes as a "great communicator." But first he has to look like he wants the part.

Check out how Fox gets Fred's fellow Republicans to take their shots at him during the debate: