Unlike the most recent presidential debate, CBS News says it will be up to the vice presidential candidates to fact-check one another Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]


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


** To fact-check or not: the big question ahead of another debate
------------------------------------------------------------
Vice presidential candidates Tim Walz, left, and JD Vance. (AP photo)

There’s a debate this week. Vice presidential candidates JD Vance and Tim Walz will square off Tuesday at 9 p.m. Eastern. CBS will host with “Face the Nation” moderator Margaret Brennan and “CBS Evening News” anchor Norah O’Donnell serving as moderators.

Like the presidential debates this year, there will be no live audience. The candidates may not have prewritten notes, but they will be given a piece of paper and a pen to take notes during the debate. Typically in the vice presidential debates, the candidates are seated. But they will stand behind podiums in this one.

But here’s the debate about the debate: Should the moderators fact-check the candidates?

CBS News said it will be up to the candidates — and not the moderators — to fact-check one another.

In the first presidential debate of this campaign cycle between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, CNN moderators did not fact-check the candidates. But during the debate between Trump and Kamala Harris, ABC moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-checked Trump on at least four occasions, including Trump’s claims that pets were being eaten in Springfield, Ohio, and false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

The way Muir and Davis handled it seemed perfect, even though Trump supporters cried foul. The moderators called out obviously false statements. While, yes, they are moderators, they also are journalists and have the responsibility to note when a candidate says something that clearly is not true.

They didn’t dwell on their fact-checking. They didn’t drag it out into long statements. They simply took what was said and corrected it and moved on.

Instead of leaving it up to the candidates to correct one another, it seems just as productive to correct blatant lies and then let the candidate respond to that if they wish. (It should be noted that CBS said its CBS News Confirmed will provide real-time fact-checking during the debate on its live blog and on social media, and then the post-debate analysis will include some of that fact-checking.)

The Associated Press’ David Bauder has more with “CBS News says it will be up to Vance and Walz to fact-check each other in veep debate.” ([link removed])

And here’s Sara Swann of Poynter’s PolitiFact with “Do you know Vance and Walz’s talking points? Prep for the vice presidential debate with fact-checks.” ([link removed])

A MESSAGE FROM POYNTER
[link removed]


** Help keep your community healthy with the facts
------------------------------------------------------------

In partnership with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Risk Less. Do More. ([link removed]) campaign, Poynter is hosting a free, 90-minute webinar featuring CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta to help journalists debunk false narratives about vaccines and respiratory illnesses. Find out about the common falsehoods that experts are tracking, and learn where to access reliable data and legitimate information about vaccination rates and trends.

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


** Bringing out the stars
------------------------------------------------------------

The 50th season of NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” debuted Saturday night and the show brought back some of its biggest past stars for a cold open ([link removed]) focused on the upcoming presidential election.

Former cast member Maya Rudolph did her spot-on Kamala Harris impression. She was joined by past “SNL” cast members Dana Carvey, who played President Joe Biden, and Andy Samberg, who played second gentleman Doug Emhoff.

Current cast member James Austin Johnson was back with his remarkable Donald Trump impersonation. Fellow cast member Bowen Yang played JD Vance, and comedian Jim Gaffigan played Tim Walz.

Overall, the season debut was OK, but not great. “Hacks” star Jean Smart was the host, and did fine, but the best moments were the cold open and “Weekend Update” — both of which concentrated on politics. Count me among those ready for a “Weekend Update” shakeup. Colin Jost and Michael Che have been anchoring it since 2014. But they were solid this past weekend.

Here’s a recap ([link removed]) of Saturday’s show from The New York Times’ Dave Itzkoff. And here’s The Washington Post’s David Von Drehle with “Live, from New York! A sort of meh TV show.” ([link removed])


** A WNBA controversy
------------------------------------------------------------

Indiana Fever guard Caitlin Clark (22) drives to the basket as Connecticut Sun guard DiJonai Carrington defends during a WNBA playoff game last Wednesday. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill)

USA Today columnist Christine Brennan is well-respected in the journalism business. She has been a champion of women's sports and a pioneer among women in sports journalism. But more than that, she has a solid reputation for being a fair reporter and columnist.

A controversy, however, has cropped up with the WNBA Players Association putting out a scathing — and, I’ll add, unfair — statement about Brennan.

It all started last week when WNBA star Caitlin Clark was poked in the eye by Connecticut Sun guard DiJonai Carrington during a playoff game. Clark ended up with a black eye. I thought it was an accidental poke as Carrington was going for the ball. But the incident gathered some steam on social media, and Brennan asked Carrington about it. The question was not out of line.

Brennan even posted the exchange ([link removed]) on X.

Brennan asked Carrington, “When you went and kind of swatted at Caitlin, did you intend to hit her in the eye? And if so, could you just, or if not, either way, could you talk about what happened on that play?”

Carrington said, “I don't even know why I would intend to hit anybody in the eye. That doesn't even make sense to me. But no I didn't. I didn't even know I hit her. I was trying to make a play on the ball and I guess I followed through and hit her. Obviously, it's never intentional, that's not even the type of player I am.”

Brennan followed up by asking if Carrington and one of her teammates later laughed about Clark getting hit. Carrington said no and, “I just told you that I didn’t even know I hit her.”

A fair question asked, and a reasonable response given. That could have and should have been it. But the controversy was just heating up.

Sports Illustrated’s Grant Young wrote ([link removed]) , “Brennan was criticized because she was accused of pushing the narrative that had been spreading online about Carrington intentionally poking Clark's eye, which was seen as disrespectful to many members of the WNBA community.”

Carrington then came under attack on social media by those who believed she hit Clark on purpose. She was disgustingly accosted with racial slurs and threats.

The WNBA Players’ Association then put out its statement ([link removed]) , criticizing Brennan by writing, “To unprofessional members of the media like Christine Brennan: You are not fooling anyone. That so-called interview in the name of journalism was a blatant attempt to bait a professional athlete into participating into a narrative that is false and designed to fuel racist, homophobic, and misogynistic vitriol on social media. You cannot hide behind your tenure. Instead of demonstrating the cornerstones of journalism ethics like integrity, objectivity, and a fundamental commitment to truth, you have chosen to be indecent and downright insincere.”

The statement went on to say, “You have abused your privileges and do not deserve the credentials issued to you. And you certainly are not entitled to any interviews with the members of this union or any other athlete in sport … We call on USA Today Network to review its Principles of Ethical Conduct for Newsrooms and address what we believe is a violation of several core principles, including seeking and reporting the truth.”

It also said, “USA Today Sports should explain why a reporter with clear bias and ulterior motives was assigned to cover the league. We also urge the league to review its policies and take measures to prevent such issues, protecting the integrity of the game and its players.”

The bias accusation might be because Brennan is writing a book about Clark.

USA Today and executive sports editor Roxanna Scott responded by backing Brennan with this statement ([link removed]) : “Journalists ask questions and seek truth. We reject the notion that the interview perpetuated any narrative other than to get the player's perspective directly. Christine Brennan is well regarded as an advocate for women and athletes, but first and foremost, she's a journalist.”

Look, there’s no question that Clark is a lightning rod in the WNBA. Anything that happens in her orbit — good or bad, on or off the court — is debated and, yes, much of it has racial undertones. Clark, who is white, has simply gone out and played the game, as have her teammates and opponents, both Black and white. Yet others, many coming from a bad place, bring race (and racist thoughts) into the conversation. I’m talking mostly about the vitriol seen on social media. So you can understand why the WNBA players are especially sensitive when it comes to all this.

But its statement regarding Brennan was out of line. I don’t always agree with Brennan’s take on things. She’s a columnist. I’m not sure anyone should agree with her 100% of the time. But Brennan was doing her job, a job she has done well and fairly for decades. In this case, she went directly to Carrington, as is the journalistically responsible thing to do.

I also don’t think there’s anything to this whole Carrington-eye poke thing. But that doesn’t mean Brennan was irresponsible for asking about it.

The WNBA Players Association is trying to protect its players. I get that. But in this case, they chose the wrong target and the wrong message.


** Odd scheduling
------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s talk a bit more about the WNBA. The league has had a record-setting season in terms of TV ratings. A lot of that had to do with Clark, who brought her hugely popular following from college into the pros. Clark’s WNBA team, the Indiana Fever, was eliminated from the playoffs last week, but the WNBA season continues. The league has moved into the semifinals. And while Clark’s team is out, that doesn’t mean interest in the league has disappeared.

So it makes for a curious decision that the semifinal round of the playoffs started on Sunday — right up against the most popular sport and program on TV: the National Football League. The first game of the Las Vegas Aces-New York Liberty series tipped off at 3 p.m. Sunday — the exact same time that eight NFL games were being played. It ended while four other games were being played.

The first game of the WNBA series between the Connecticut Sun and Minnesota Lynx was played Sunday night at 8:30 p.m. — the exact same time of the Sunday night marquee NFL matchup between the Buffalo Bills and Baltimore Ravens. By the way, “Sunday Night Football” is the most-watched program on television.

I’m a sports fan. I like the WNBA just fine. I’ll watch a lot of these playoffs. But like the majority of sports fans, I’m not going to watch the WNBA, or any other sport for that matter, over the NFL on Sunday.

I realize there are dedicated WNBA fans, but why would the league go up against the NFL? There are a whole lot of sports fans who might watch your product if you were to schedule your biggest games at any other time except for Sunday.

Just a strange choice.

By the way, “60 Minutes” and correspondent Jon Wertheim featured the WNBA on Sunday in “WNBA players Caitlin Clark, Napheesa Collier, Aliyah Boston talk transformational season.” ([link removed])


** Best comeback
------------------------------------------------------------
Fox Sports broadcaster Tom Brady, left, talks with Tampa Bay Bucs quarterback Baker Mayfield before Sunday’s NFL game in Tampa between the Bucs and Philadelphia Eagles. (AP Photo/Peter Joneleit)

Speaking of the NFL, all-time great Tom Brady is still feeling his way as a broadcaster for Fox Sports. After a rough debut, he seems to be getting a tad better every week. On Sunday, he returned to Tampa Bay to call the Buccaneers-Philadelphia Eagles game. Brady spent the final three seasons of his Hall of Fame career with Tampa Bay and won a Super Bowl there.

During the broadcast, Fox posted a quote on screen from Baker Mayfield, the quarterback who replaced Brady. Mayfield had told the “Casa De Klub” podcast, “The building was a little bit different with Tom in there. Obviously, playing-wise, Tom is different. He had everybody dialed in, high-strung environment, so I think everybody was pretty stressed out. They wanted me to come in, be myself, bring the joy back to football for guys who weren’t having as much fun.”

Intended or not, that was a bit of a shot at Brady.

Brady had a pretty good on-air response: “I thought stressful was not having Super Bowl rings. There was a mindset of a champion that I took to work every day. This wasn’t day care. If I wanted to have fun, I was gonna go to Disneyland with my kids.”

That’s a comeback. And he said even more. Check it out here ([link removed]) .

I’ll add: I’d like to see even more of this from Brady the broadcaster.


** Media tidbits
------------------------------------------------------------
* Variety’s Brian Steinberg with “Amazon in Talks With Brian Williams to Host Election-Night Special.” ([link removed])
* Adweek’s Ethan Alter with “Kristen Welker Celebrates 1 Year at ‘Meet the Press’ With Ratings Gains.” ([link removed])
* PolitiFact’s Amy Sherman with “What does Project 2025 say about the National Weather Service, NOAA and National Hurricane Center?” ([link removed])
* The Los Angeles Times’ Wendy Lee with “Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoes AI safety bill opposed by Silicon Valley.” ([link removed])


** Hot type
------------------------------------------------------------
* Country music pioneer and actor Kris Kristofferson has died. He was 88. Here’s an excellent remembrance from John Johnson in The Los Angeles Times ([link removed]) .
* And here’s Bill Friskics-Warren story for The New York Times ([link removed]) about Kristofferson.
* From “CBS News Sunday Morning”: “President Joe Biden on Jimmy Carter's 100th birthday.” ([link removed])


** More resources for journalists
------------------------------------------------------------
* Understand critical aspects of the swiftly evolving AI landscape at Level Up ([link removed]) .
* Check out our dynamic, in-person workshop ([link removed]) for new newsroom managers.
* Try our free Grant Writing for Journalists ([link removed]) self-directed course.

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]) .