October 4, 2016

CNN drains the political talent from Buzzfeed.

What will happen now to the once-vibrant, genre-crushing force that is Buzzfeed? Will CNN successfully jazz up its brand or is it just extracting the political vigor from Buzzfeed?

The NYT reports:
Andrew Kaczynski, the BuzzFeed reporter whose scoop about Donald J. Trump’s early support for the invasion of Iraq surfaced in the presidential debate last week, is leaving to join CNN, just a month before the election.

The two other members of BuzzFeed’s political research team, Nathan McDermott and Christopher Massie, and Kyle Blaine, the deputy politics editor, are also going to CNN, leaving BuzzFeed short-handed for the final stretch of the campaign.
Short-handed! (Funny to see that word again after delving into its significance yesterday, the first day of the new Supreme Court term, with the Court said to be "short-handed," something I problematized here and here.)

Back to the NYT:
The departures, which come only weeks after BuzzFeed said it was formally dividing its news and entertainment divisions, are also likely to resurface questions about the company’s plans for its news operation.... The moves... leave a void at BuzzFeed, which has built its news reputation on its political coverage and is gearing up for what will probably be a frenetic last month of the campaign....
The departures could also feed the apparent feud between Jeff Zucker, the president of CNN, who recently said he did not think BuzzFeed was a “legitimate” news organization, and [BuzzFeed editor in chief Ben Smith], who said that CNN had given too much airtime to Donald Trump in the interest of ratings....

On Monday, Mr. Smith said in an email: “I guess this means that CNN has seen the value in doing the kind of tough reporting on Donald Trump that BuzzFeed News has been doing all presidential cycle, and we wish Andrew good luck.”

27 comments:

rehajm said...

The departures could also feed the apparent feud between Jeff Zucker, the president of CNN, who recently said he did not think BuzzFeed was a “legitimate” news organization

Oh good lord. Clearly a graduate of the Clinton Cchool of Hypocrisy.

Bob Boyd said...

Goebbels and Riefenstahl also quarreled about the best way to serve the party.

rehajm said...

"CNN drains the political talent from Buzzfeed.

Here 'CNN' 'Buzzfeed' and 'drains' all belong together, 'talent' is the thing that's not like other things.

rhhardin said...

It's not as if CNN bought Drudge.

Curious George said...

Didn't Monica drain Bill's political talent.

AprilApple said...

A private citizen had cool support for the war, then pulled that support off the table.

Hillary actually voted for the war. Biased hack DNC press will now tell you which one is worse.

AprilApple said...

You prove your chops inside the Democrat Media Industrial Complex by digging for meaningless dirt that can be manipulated into a narrative that helps democrats.

James Pawlak said...

CNN = "Clinton's News Network"

Annie said...

So CNN, another tentacle of the DNC, is bringing in reinforcements for Hillary's campaign.

robother said...

"Problematized"? Ann, I don't think anyone who uses "problematized" unironically should be busting anyone's chops for garnering attention by using arcane or archaic words.

Brando said...

File this under "news that is not news". Now, if CNN picked up Sean Hannity, that'd be news. This is up there with "Jets and Giants trade punters".

MadisonMan said...

Consider whether the hire would have taken place if the "journolist" in question had published screeds critical of the Empress.

Mike said...

Buzzfeed was very useful to the old dogs of the MSM when they had nothing -- NOTHING -- to attack Trump on regarding Iraq. They managed to turn an offhand remark on a radio show made ONE TIME with clearly ambivalent intent into a more important "position" for Trump than the actual vote-to-go-to-war that Hillary made.

Nice work media tricksters. Reward: promotion to CNN.

tim in vermont said...

Wouldn't it be great to have a media that thought that its job was to do "tough reporting" on all candidates?

Laslo Spatula said...

""CNN drains the political talent from Buzzfeed."

Don't look in the drain trap.


I am The Replacement Laslo.

tim in vermont said...

It's not that "garner" is arcane, or archaic, it's that it has been almost completely replaced by 'get' in English usage, a perfectly fine word that the media seems to have it out against. You show me the objection to 'garner' she uses where the word 'get' would not work better, and then we can talk.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
robother said...

Words that have been completely replaced in English usage are said to be archaic, no? Or do you find "archaic" to be similarly offensive to modern taste, replaced, so to speak, by "replaced"?

Michael K said...

And the news business still revolves around Trump.

damikesc said...

Gotta get some more Clinton water carriers at the Clinton News Network STAT!

Buzzfeed was very useful to the old dogs of the MSM when they had nothing -- NOTHING -- to attack Trump on regarding Iraq. They managed to turn an offhand remark on a radio show made ONE TIME with clearly ambivalent intent into a more important "position" for Trump than the actual vote-to-go-to-war that Hillary made.

He was also extremely critical of the war years before Hillary was. But a Stern interview CLEARLY trumps a vote for war.

Birkel said...

OBJECTION: Assumes facts not in evidence.

First you must prove Buzzfeed had any talent.

AJ Lynch said...

CNN..Buzzfeed...NBC etc ..their journolistors are indistinguishable to me. Not a conservative to be found at any of them.

Brian McKim & Traci Skene said...

"...are also likely to resurface questions..." Are these questions slick and shiny? Or do they have a dull or bumpy surface! They are thorny, perhaps. NYT, eh?

Mike said...

I see a pattern:

1992 Hillary says she ain't some Tammy Wynette standing by her man. From that point on she stood by her meandering man and has reaped praise from Feminists and MSM ever since.

1999 Hillary says marriage between a man and woman is a special sacred bedrock foundation of our nation and DOMA was necessary to reinforce that fact. Since 2011 she has pretended she was always for gay marriage and the MSM and gayctivists have praised her effusively. {To my knowledge Trump has never expressed a negative view toward gays and is seen as friendly towards "the community."]

2002 Hillary votes with unanimous (minus one) Congress to approve Iraq War. Three years later she "regrets" her decision and opposes "surge" and MSM and doves pretend that she's "always opposed war against Oceania."

But yeah, that ambivalent Howard Stern interview Donald did was WAY more meaningful than a sitting Senator (wife of the guy who claimed Saddam had WMDs by the way) who actually authorized the war.

Got it. And the MSM wonders why the public holds them in lower esteem than either actual candidate.

Darrell said...

Chuck---What am I? Chopped liver?

Sir Lags Alot said...

CNN's reporting will obviously be worse than usual. I'm trying to decide if Buzzfeed's reporting will be worse or just suck less.

Sam L. said...

Sir Lags, how could it possibly NOT be be worse or suck less?