OPINION

Covering the Media in the Brian Stelter Era

Brad Slager
Brad Slager  |  Aug 19, 2022
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

He gave every reason to show there was the need to keep the press in check. 

While it was huge news on Thursday that Brian Stelter was canceled and pushed out at CNN, there was not a soul who was shocked. The mile markers of his tenure at the network began descending to the single digits last Fall when the new management from Warner Bros. Discovery began talks on how they wanted to revamp the foundering news net. Then there was the exit of Jeff Zucker, the implosion of CNN+, and finally, "Reliable Sources" hitting new lows in the ratings before the final offramp loomed. 

Stelter's demise was wholly earned, and I have been shown one perfect example that typifies all the reasons he was seen as an undiluted leftist partisan. But first, I want to issue some gratitude toward Brian. 

As I have covered politics and the press for a good portion of my writing career, the man has always rankled me with his unprofessional manner. His bias only fed the mounting problems seen in the journalism complex, so I was compelled to join the fray. In formulating my Townhall column, "Riffed from the Headlines," there was a question of how much coverage I would do. 

As I first sketched the plan, I envisioned maybe three columns a week, featuring a few entries per day and organizing them with five or so categories. Quickly, I found I could mine content for a daily column with a handful of examples, and my categories quickly swelled to over a dozen now. Studying Stelter helped because he displayed so many problems in a self-contained vessel that I could apply those like a prism on the industry and pick out all the objectionable material. 

Recommended

Merry Christmas, And Democrats Can Go To Hell Derek Hunter
'We're F**ked': Dem Donor Reveals a Family Member Knew Dems Were Cooked After Speaking With Joe Matt Vespa

But I also had to avoid an overreliance on the man. Honestly, just covering Stelter alone could have possibly fulfilled that original parameter I saw for my column. But I have consciously worked not to use him too much. This is the man, after all, who impugned Fox as a bunch of "Repeaters, not reporters." That was his stinging barb – about the network he complained about nearly every single day. 

The news of his firing created a firestorm on social media, as expected. As a result, I had some accounts retweeting a post I made concerning Brian from January of this year. It is a great example in that it is emblematic of a number of the problems that have been on display with the career of the CNN media guru. That so many can be contained within the limited scope of a single tweet is the bonus here. 

The first element is an obvious one; his quotidian obsession with Fox News. Then the topic is primarily about vaccines, which at the time were still a lingering issue in the press in the dying throes of the attempted pandemic control on the population. The chyron reads "Covid Misinfo," another common focus of the host. CNN spewing their share of Covid misinformation over the pandemic was never placed under Stelter's interrogation spotlight. 

He next criticizes Tucker Carlson for not challenging his guest, Glenn Beck. "He doesn't ask any questions, he just listens." This has long been the trait of Stelter himself on his show; he would invite friendly guests, tee them up with introductory questions, and just let them deliver. Then Brian launches into his main attack, and that is Beck's claim that Covid camps could become a reality. This is outlandish, according to Stelter, and he detailed how people showed up to protest at a Seattle health clinic – all because of nutty conspiracies from Fox News. 

Or…national polls showing exactly this kind of thinking. Just as Brian was scoffing at the unrealistic nature of this all, Rasmussen Reports came out with a poll that showed there was support for some very drastic action to be taken against those refusing to be vaccinated, including penalties, jail time, and even (gasp) placing them in internment camps. Those showing the most support for these daft ideas are not exactly the typical Tucker audience members. 

Here is where Stelter is supremely exposed. This particular poll was released the week ahead of his broadcast. Just a modicum of research should have had this turned up, meaning he and his staff either likely never researched for their segment or chose to ignore the contradiction. Neither makes the expert on holding journalism responsible appear responsible himself. He blames Fox for a crackpot theory, misses a national poll supporting the idea, and elides that it was leftists and not rabid Fox vax deniers promoting the ideas. 

All of these issues were on display and housed in just a two-minute segment; it shows how ingrained all his foibles had become. He also has shown that his method does not work. His program had been on the air for 30 years, and he augured it into a ratings ravine. Recently, he hit some audience figures so low they were not seen for more than a decade before he began as host. 

This is the very character that drew me into the realm of covering the press, even leading to my contrarian podcast called "Lie-Able Sources." Over time, Brian has shown us how not to do this job, and in so doing, he has shown me the way. While he will be missed in some ways, he does not leave a void for me, and I take comfort that I did not overly rely on him for content. Through Brian Stelter, I learned what to look for – and learned not to subsist too much on one source, reliable or not.