CNN’s ratings are down, partly because of cord-cutting. But it’s also facing stiff competition from the more opinionated cable news channels. Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]


** OPINION
------------------------------------------------------------


** A big week for Biden, Trump and … CNN
------------------------------------------------------------
Signage outside the media file center for the upcoming presidential debate is seen near the CNN Techwood campus in Atlanta on Tuesday. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

This is a big week for President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump as they face off in Thursday’s debate — the first of two scheduled debates before the November election.

It’s also a big week for CNN, the host of Thursday night’s debate.

This is a delicate time for cable news in general, and CNN in particular. Ratings are down, partly because more and more folks are cord-cutting. But CNN is also facing stiff competition from the more opinionated cable news channels Fox News and MSNBC.

As The Associated Press’ David Bauder notes ([link removed]) , “Fox News Channel has averaged 2.14 million viewers in prime time this month, with MSNBC at 1.22 million and CNN at 525,000, according to the Nielsen company. That’s down 17% from last June for CNN.”

It’s not as if one big debate night will turn around CNN’s fortunes. Plus, CNN is making the debate available to other news outlets for simulcast. So, for example, the dedicated Fox News viewer is likely to watch the debate on Fox News. They’ll see CNN’s logo plastered all over the screen, but for pre- and post-debate coverage, for instance, the viewers will likely retreat to where they generally get their news.

Because of that, Bauder writes, “It’s possible — even likely — that CNN won’t even have the biggest American audience on Thursday.”

However, the debate will feature CNN moderators — Jake Tapper and Dana Bash — and the format was picked by CNN (and agreed to by Biden and Trump). So it does matter to CNN.

The Wall Street Journal’s Isabella Simonetti wrote ([link removed]) , “Thursday’s debate carries great opportunity—and risk—for the network, which beyond its sagging-ratings problem is still looking for a direction after frequent leadership changes, with three different leaders in less than three years.”

According to Simonetti, the current leader, Mark Thompson, told staff at a meeting this week, “I think we’re going to hear ourselves and read about ourselves all week. And there’s some inevitable consequences of that. Not everything we read will be entirely positive.”

Some of the criticism, no matter how the debate goes, is expected to come from people in the Trump camp, who are already laying the groundwork that their candidate won’t be treated fairly.

That brings us to …


** What about that mute button?
------------------------------------------------------------

One of the more interesting wrinkles in this debate is the mute button. The candidates have been told that their microphones will be cut off if they speak when it’s not their turn.

But how, exactly, is it going to work? More importantly, who is in charge of the so-called mute button?

In his AP story, David Bauder asked David Chalian, CNN’s vice president and political director, but Chalian would not reveal who is in charge of it. There certainly will be times when both Biden and Trump are talking simultaneously, and CNN needs to allow a bit of that give-and-take. It’s the repeated interruptions that might require the mute button.

Also, don’t be surprised if the candidate whose microphone is shut off still can be heard. This is not going to be perfect.

For its part, CNN says it merely is concerned about the debate itself, with Chalian adding, “Let’s be clear. The stakes are highest for Donald Trump and Joe Biden. They’re the participants in this debate.”

A MESSAGE FROM POYNTER
[link removed]


** A transformative leadership program for BIPOC journalists
------------------------------------------------------------

Poynter is looking for the next cohort of BIPOC journalists to participate in its eighth Leadership Academy for Diversity in Media in September 2024. Through this program, Poynter has coached nearly 200 journalists of color as they focus on becoming more effective managers, visionary leaders and change agents.

Read more and apply now ([link removed]) .


** Unique perspective
------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton during their presidential debate on Oct. 9, 2016. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)

There is one person out there who knows what it’s like to debate both Joe Biden and Donald Trump

Hillary Clinton.

She debated Trump three times in 2016 when they ran against each other for president. She also was part of a debate with Biden during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary race.

Clinton wrote a guest essay for The New York Times: “I’ve Debated Trump and Biden. Here’s What I’m Watching For.” ([link removed])

About Trump, Clinton wrote, “It is a waste of time to try to refute Mr. Trump’s arguments like in a normal debate. It’s nearly impossible to identify what his arguments even are. He starts with nonsense and then digresses into blather. This has gotten only worse in the years since we debated. I was not surprised that after a recent meeting, several chief executives said ([link removed]) that Mr. Trump, as one journalist described it, ‘could not keep a straight thought’ and was ‘all over the map.’ Yet expectations for him are so low that if he doesn’t literally light himself on fire on Thursday evening, some will say he was downright presidential.”

Despite this, Clinton goes into detail about what she expects Thursday night, and which tactics she would use if she was there. It’s a really good primer for the debate, so check it out.


** An important letter
------------------------------------------------------------

The Wall Street Journal published a letter from editor-in-chief Emma Tucker ([link removed]) on Tuesday. The subject was Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who is about to go to trial in Russia after being accused of espionage. The paper and the U.S. government vehemently deny that Gershkovich is a spy. The U.S. considers him “wrongfully detained.”

Tucker wrote, in part, “When his case comes before a judge ([link removed]) this week, it will not be a trial as we understand it, with a presumption of innocence and a search for the truth. Rather, it will be held in secret. No evidence has been unveiled. And we already know the conclusion: This bogus accusation of espionage will inevitably lead to a bogus conviction for an innocent man who would then face up to 20 years in prison for simply doing his job. And an excellent job he was doing, at that.”

Gershkovich has been detained in Russia since March 2023. Russian President Vladimir Putin has hinted that, eventually, there could be a prisoner swap that would allow Gershkovich to return to the U.S. But that hasn’t happened as what is expected to be a sham trial gets underway.

Tucker wrote, “Even covering the case presents challenges to us and other news organizations over how to report responsibly on the proceedings and the allegations. We pride ourselves on our impartial and accurate reporting that doesn’t take sides and avoids bias. Nor would we repeat baseless allegations that we know categorically to be untrue lest we amplify the slander against Evan. We will state the facts clearly as we know them, as we did in our headline and story earlier this month when news of his indictment was announced: WSJ Reporter Evan Gershkovich, Falsely Accused of Espionage, Is Indicted in Russia ([link removed]) . As we pledged earlier this year, we will continue to tell Evan’s story until he can tell his own.”


** Doing the right thing
------------------------------------------------------------

The Associated Press announced Tuesday that it is setting up a sister organization to fundraise for and support state and local journalism.

In a statement ([link removed]) , the AP said the new organization will have a separate board of directors and the 501(c)3 charitable organization “will help AP sustain, augment and grow journalism and services for the industry, as well as help fund other entities that share a commitment to state and local news.”

AP president and CEO Daisy Veerasingham said in the statement, “The crisis in local news is only exacerbating. It’s AP’s role as the cooperative at the heart of the news ecosystem to both reinforce our own state and local reporting as well as support other organizations who share our commitment to local journalism. State and local news is essential, both to the democratic process and to combatting misinformation. Simply put, it’s a public good.”

Veerasingham told the AP’s David Bauder ([link removed]) , “We feel we have to lean in at this point, not pull back. But the supporting mechanism — the local newspaper market that used to support this — can’t afford to do that anymore.”

The new group will be called The AP Fund for Journalism. The initial fundraising goal is around $100 million.

Veerasingham told Axios’ Sara Fischer ([link removed]) , “I haven't put a timeline around that yet, but that's our initial goal.”

Fischer wrote, “The new funds will be used to support AP's local journalism efforts, as well as the work of other organizations or services that support local newsrooms, per Veerasingham. The allocation of those funds will be up to the organization's independent directors. Within the AP, the funds could be used to help build services that can localize big datasets for local newsrooms, Veerasingham said. The funding could also help the AP build training and services around artificial intelligence for local newsrooms. (AP inked a two-year licensing and tech-sharing deal with ChatGPT parent OpenAI last year.) AP will retain complete editorial control of all journalism it will produce with philanthropic funding from the new organization.”

AP executive editor Julie Pace tweeted ([link removed]) , “So excited about this new initiative @AP, as we look to deepen our longstanding commitment to state and local news in the United States.”


** Setting another record
------------------------------------------------------------

Angel Reese, of the WNBA’s Chicago Sky, reacts to a foul in a game on Sunday against the Indiana Fever. (AP Photo/Doug McSchooler)

Last Sunday’s WNBA game between former college rivals Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese set another record. On Sunday, Reese’s Chicago Sky defeated Clark’s Indiana Fever in a game watched by an average of 2.302 million viewers on ESPN, making it the most-watched WNBA game in 23 years.

Earlier this month, on June 16, a matchup between Clark and Reese averaged 2.25 million viewers on CBS — which, at the time, was the most-watched WNBA game in 23 years.

This is a continuation of the rivalry — and avid following — the two had in college when Clark played at Iowa and Reese played at LSU. Two of their college games are among the most-watched women’s basketball games of all time. They met in the NCAA Tournament during the Elite Eight round this past spring with 12.3 million watching on ESPN. Their meeting in the 2023 national championship averaged 9.9 million.

Meanwhile, Washington Post sports columnist Sally Jenkins with her usual outstanding effort in “Pick a side in the Caitlin Clark-Angel Reese rivalry, but don’t look away.” ([link removed])

Jenkins writes, “They’re getting better nightly — and it’s the rest of the league that is figuring out how to grow to meet their vast, expanding aspirations. The pity is that they won’t play each other again until August. By then, a potential playoff spot may well be on the line. In the meantime, they may just succeed at their mutual enterprise and lock a once-fickle WNBA audience into a forever embrace.”


** Media tidbits
------------------------------------------------------------
* Good stuff from my Poynter colleague Amaris Castillo: “L.A. Taco was forced to furlough its staff. Reader support brought them back within 24 hours.” ([link removed])
* Variety’s Todd Spangler with “MTV News Website Goes Dark, Archives Pulled Offline.” ([link removed])
* For Vanity Fair, Jon Allsop with “The Moral Panic Around the ‘British Invasion’ of US Newsrooms.” ([link removed])
* Awful Announcing’s Sean Keeley writes about the polarizing American soccer analyst: “What’s the deal with Alexi Lalas?” ([link removed])
* JJ Redick went from NBA player to ESPN analyst and podcaster to head coach of the iconic Los Angeles Lakers despite no coaching experience. His introductory press conference was, well, kind of off-putting for a moment. Front Office Sports’ Michael McCarthy would a good take in “JJ Redick’s Hypocritical Potshots at the ‘Engagement Farming Industry.’” ([link removed])


** Hot type
------------------------------------------------------------
* The Atlantic’s Caitlin Dickerson with “‘I Am Pleasing to Everyone.’ I can’t stop watching the Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders.” ([link removed])
* Summer road trip idea: The New York Times with “22 of the Best Pizza Places in the United States.” ([link removed])


** More resources for journalists
------------------------------------------------------------
* Applications close soon for Leadership Academy for Diversity in Media ([link removed]) .
* GlobalFact 11 ([link removed]) — June 26-28. Get yourvirtual ticket ([link removed]) to the world’s largest and most impactful annual summit for professional fact-checking.
* Manage big responsibilities without direct reports? Try Lead With Influence ([link removed]) .

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) .
[link removed]
I want more analysis of the news media to help me understand my world. ([link removed])
GIVE NOW ([link removed])

ADVERTISE ([link removed]) // DONATE ([link removed]) // LEARN ([link removed]) // JOBS ([link removed])
Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here. ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20for%20Poynter
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
© All rights reserved Poynter Institute 2024
801 Third Street South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701
If you don't want to receive email updates from Poynter, we understand.
You can change your subscription preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe from all Poynter emails ([link removed]) .