This Jeff Zucker story isn’t going away for a while. It has legs to last a long time, and tentacles to reach in a lot of different directions.
A lot of questions remain, such as ….
What role does recently-fired Chris Cuomo play in all of this? Does any of this somehow tie back to former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the sexual misconduct allegations that forced him out of office? Who will permanently replace Zucker? What does this mean for the launch of the streaming service, CNN+ — which is supposed to get off the ground this spring? How does this impact Allison Gollust, CNN’s executive vice president and chief marketing officer, who is in a relationship with Zucker?
For now, Michael Bass, Amy Entelis, and Ken Jautz will share leadership duties. Interestingly, before all this went down, Zucker was expected to leave CNN sooner rather than later anyway, and do you know who’s name occasionally floated as a potential replacement? Allison Gollust. Who knows if there was anything to that, but Gollust certainly has had a strong presence at CNN.
Why did Zucker have to go?
I want to revisit something that has come up more than once at CNN, including on the air. Look, I get that many at CNN loved working for Zucker, and are upset that he is no longer there. By most accounts, Zucker was well-respected and well-liked inside the company. But, frankly, I’m a little surprised at how many there are reportedly confused as to why Zucker had to resign. The argument of some, including on-air anchor Alisyn Camerota, is that Zucker and Gollust were single and that their relationship was consensual. So what’s the problem?
According to CNN’s Brian Stelter, CNN anchor Dana Bash said in a tense employees’ meeting with WarnerMedia CEO Jason Kilar that the “punishment doesn’t fit the crime.”
In other words, did Zucker have to go?
The problem starts with the fact that Zucker and Gollust didn’t officially disclose that they were romantically involved. Maybe their relationship was an open secret, but it was not officially disclosed. There had always been rumors. “But,” The New York Times’ John Koblin and Michael M. Grynbaum wrote, “the rumors stayed only rumors, until Wednesday.”
That’s a big issue.
Koblin and Grynbaum wrote, “WarnerMedia’s standards policy states that personal relationships must be disclosed immediately to ‘avoid a conflict of interest,’ particularly if one of the people is in a ‘position to influence’ a career track.”
That’s it in a nutshell, as well as the potential of lawsuits from any number of CNN employees in the future, including Gollust if her relationship with Zucker ended somehow while Zucker was still the big boss.
Then again …
Having said all that, it does sound as if everybody knew about the relationship between Zucker and Gollust. To say it was an “open secret” might not do it justice. One source told Variety’s Matt Donnelly and Elizabeth Wagmeister, “It wasn’t even an open secret. It was just open.”
Did WarnerMedia simply look the other way? And why is it now, all of a sudden, that the relationship is a problem? (Again, that fuels speculation that this Cuomo part of the story has fingerprints all over this and, if you don’t mind me mixing my metaphors, the other shoe is eventually going to drop.)
For the record, Stelter reported that Kilar just learned of the Zucker-Gollust relationship and there are reports that Kilar and Zucker had a “frosty” relationship. Stelter also reported that Kilar’s meeting with CNN’s Washington, D.C,. staff, including some prominent on-air personalities, didn’t go over well because Kilar didn’t get into specifics. However, he told staff, “I feel comfortable in my decision. I do.”
To be clear, as Stelter reported, if Zucker hadn’t resigned, Kilar would have fired him. Again, that’s what at least two sources told Stelter.
Zucker’s legacy
Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan went a different route in the Zucker story with her column, “Jeff Zucker’s legacy is defined by his promotion of Donald Trump.”
Sullivan wrote, “Zucker, as much as any other person in the world, created and burnished the Trump persona — first as a reality-TV star who morphed into a worldwide celebrity, then as a candidate for president who was given large amounts of free publicity. The through line? Nothing nobler than TV ratings, which always were Zucker’s guiding light, his be-all and end-all and, ultimately, his fatal flaw.”
Sullivan closed with this damning indictment: “But why is American democracy in peril? Some portion of the blame — not a tiny portion — belongs to the network executive who couldn’t resist the ‘ratings machine.’”
More from The Washington Post
Post media critic Erik Wemple’s latest piece: “Jeff Zucker, Allison Gollust personally pushed for Andrew Cuomo-Chris Cuomo interviews.”
Wemple wrote, “… here you have the top officials at CNN personally engaged in securing interviews that breach the network’s standards, all in the interest of ratings and buzz. They had a hand in the very brand of line-crossing that eventually helped to sink Chris Cuomo. The awkwardness filtered across organizations, too: Do you think Andrew Cuomo wanted to say no to his brother’s bosses? As the Erik Wemple Blog argued months ago, Chris Cuomo deserved some company in suffering accountability from this entire mess. It seems he now has some.”
One last thing (today) on Zucker
I need to be upfront. In my 2021 Year in Media column, I named Zucker my “Media Personality of the Year.” I praised him for his decision to cut ties with Cuomo, someone he had been close to over the years. For that, I called him a “strong leader.” That particular endorsement might come back to haunt me if we learn more about the Cuomo situation in the coming days and weeks. And you can obviously find those who aren’t Zucker’s biggest fans. (See: Margaret Sullivan’s column above.)
But I’m also going to stand behind my claim that Zucker is an influential media figure who deserves credit for the solid work he has done at CNN, including what I expect to be a rather successful CNN+ service that will launch soon. His CNN colleagues, as we have seen, rave about him. Was this a messy end to his time at CNN? No question. Is CNN fighting the ratings at the moment? Yes. But was he an effective news leader who did plenty of positive things and still has more to contribute to the media landscape? I believe so.
The Olympics are here