CNN Connecticut Massacre Coverage Notes

CNN’s coverage plans for tonight…

7pmE Erin Burnett OutFront; Ashleigh Banfield anchors from location
8pmE Anderson Cooper 360; with Soledad O’Brien from location
9pmE Piers Morgan Tonight
10pmE Anderson Cooper 360; with Soledad O’Brien from location
11pmE Erin Burnett OutFront; Ashleigh Banfield anchors from location

Saturday…

6am – 9amE Ali Velshi and John Berman
9am – 11amE Soledad O’Brien
11am – 1pmE Wolf Blitzer
1pm – 3pmE Don Lemon
3pm – 5pmE Soledad O’Brien
5pm – 8pmE Wolf Blitzer and Kate Bolduan
8pm – 9pmE Anderson Cooper
9pm – 10pmE Don Lemon and Soledad O’Brien
10pm – 11pmE Anderson Cooper

Update: Sunday…

6am – 8amE Connecticut School Shooting anchored by John Berman & Kate Bolduan (on location)
9am – 10amE State of the Union with Candy Crowley (on location)
10am – 12pmE Connecticut School Shooting anchored by Wolf Blitzer & Soledad O’Brien (on location)
12pm – 1pmE State of the Union with Candy Crowley (on location)
1pm – 3pmE Connecticut School Shooting anchored by Don Lemon (on location)
3pm – 5pmE Connecticut School Shooting anchored by Erin Burnett (on location)
5pm – 6pmE Connecticut School Shooting anchored by Wolf Blitzer (on location)
6pm – 7pmE Connecticut School Shooting anchored by Anderson Cooper (on location)
7pm – 8pmE Erin Burnett OutFront (on location)
8pm – 9pmE Anderson Cooper 360 (on location)
9pm – 10pmE Piers Morgan Tonight
10pm – 11pmE Anderson Cooper 360 (on location)

About these ads

34 Responses to “CNN Connecticut Massacre Coverage Notes”

  1. wheresthebeef09 Says:

    Long day for Soledad & Wolf.
    And interesting that CNN didn’t decide to put in Piers Morgan at 9pm….hmmm…

  2. Are we giving these murders too much coverage? Are we telling future mass murderers that the way to get massive TV coverage is to kill children?

  3. Well, Sean did a perfectly nice, respectful show, while Piers spent a good amount of time yelling about gun control.

  4. Keep yelling, Piers. I’m sick of this “slippery slope” NRA crap. Restrict the damn things.

    MSNBC is live at 10est with Chris Jansing.

  5. I wonder if Piers has a bodyguard. I wonder if his bodyguard has a gun.

  6. Yes, Joe, because prohibition worked so well with alcohol and works so well now with drugs, prostitution, etc. In fact, how many people die in alcohol-related car accidents? Maybe we should go back to restricting alcohol.

  7. Restrict how? Be specific!

  8. Restoring the Assault Weapons Ban would be a start. Crack down on unlicensed gun brokers on the internet; eliminate access to large magazines. Do SOMETHING, for God’s sake. The fckin NRA bleats “slippery slope” at every attempt to control access to guns, and we all shrug our shoulders and let them win. ENOUGH.

  9. - Motive, do something -

    Pretty much everyone thinking about this horrific and senseless act is in the same boat, regardless of political persuasion. Our human minds are wired to find a way to make sense of the senseless, and we naturally want to reject that there are some very horrible things that will always be beyond our ability to control.

    I’d prefer not hearing reporters and opinion heads go straight to the political arguments before things settle, but they’re also human and it’s understandable. Their questions and opinions won’t reveal any sense to the senseless but they have to try. For some viewers the political argument might even be comforting… it’s doing something.

    - A good start-
    The NRA sponsors very good gun safety classes. Along with lobbying for gun rights they should put equal effort into gun safety legislation. Without infringing on our right to own guns, the state can regulate by requiring the use of gun locks, gun safes, and lessons on using them. They aren’t expensive and there’s no good reason to keep unlocked guns around.

  10. F*ck the NRA. “Gun safety”. Bullsh!t.

  11. ^ Thanks for that, Joe.

  12. You anticipated a reasonable response. That’s cute.

  13. You’re welcome. Take your “gun safety” BS elsewhere. The NRA is a militant organization run by a psychopath with a gun fetish. They object to ALL restrictions while warning their members that POTUS is coming for ALL THE GUNS. I don’t care if you keep your guns, but stop supporting that monster.

  14. My response was entirely reasonable in the face of NRA apologists. Get that stupid sticker off your truck.

  15. I might be a little upset. I’m sorry, Al.

  16. You were upset? That’s news to me.

  17. The NRA wants a gun in every hand and no regulation because all they care about is the gun and ammo manufacturers, hence the reason they push the Obama conspiracy bull. They can’t even offer condolences to the victims killed because they want more facts. F them.

  18. Regarding the coverage. The Aurora Massacre, Benghazi, Hurricane Sandy and now the Newtown Massacre — terrible coverage from the cable nets. CBS really really needs a news channel.

  19. I live in Virginia and remember the media feeding frenzy the shooting at Virginia Tech created a few years ago.the media is doing it again with this incident.There is only one reason to analize events like this to the ridiculous degree that the media is reaching,to keep eyeballs glued to the screen that shows advertising.

    The level of coverage from national to local is far and beyond what anyone who isn’t directly involved or effected needs.In Va,local channels are even reairing coverage from the Tech shooting.I’ve seen a “history of school shootings” and all sorts of peices on helping your kids,even though they aren’t actually a part of this,cope and deal with a shooting they don’t actually need to know has happened and only do because of the media coverage that you can’t escape.

    I wish sometimes we lived in a society that allowed for stronger control of the media.24 hours after this event,no media should have been allowed within a hundred miles of this town.the local residents who are grieving and hurting don’t need 100 cameras in their faces.The parents and family of the dead don’t need to see their lost family and friends on the TV a thousand times a day,or to have to relive the events down to the minute detail over and over.

    Who does any of this benefit?The only answer is the media.

    As for gun control,this is not the forum for that discussion.

    “Gun control” can mean many things.Banning assault weapons,which weren’t used here,isn’t relevent.

    The only way THIS could have been stopped would be a total hand gun ownership ban in the United States.Let that sink in and everything that would bring with it.

  20. Spdavid, you’re near Blacksburg?

    The Virginia Tech shooting got wayyyyyy too much coverage nationally.

  21. I’m in Va,Richmond area.Lots of alumni here,it was way over covered state wide.

  22. Mass killings are almost always a mental illness problem and not a gun control issue. A mentally ill person that wants to commit a mass killing, for whatever deranged reason, will almost always be able to obtain the guns and ammo necessary in the US.

    What can happen is regulating and controlling how guns (particularly hand guns) are purchased, transported and stored. Even more important is the sale and control of ammunition. A gun without ammo is a club. Ammunition should be strictly controlled in every way possible.

    Gun and ammo control isn’t going to stop mass killings or even greatly lessen there occurrence but it will cut down on gun deaths caused by domestic violence, accidents, gang retribution, road rage, suicide etc.

    Sadly It wouldn’t matter if this killer had murdered every child in this school, or in every school in Newtown, restricting gun ownership in the US; or even having minimal controls and regulations, are not going to happen anytime in the near future – if ever.

  23. “Mass killings are almost always a mental illness problem and not a gun control issue”

    Charles Krauthammer (a trained doctor and psychologist) made the excellent point last night that people view these events three ways: (1) as a gun control issue; (2) as a cultural issue; and (3) as a mental health/illness issue. He saw it as – or focused on the third one.

    Can we do more to spot unstable people? Can mental health professionals be given more power to intervene? Can privacy rights be limited in such instances?

    I think we all acknowledge that we can’t stop all of these horrible events. But can we mitigate them, make them less frequent and less violent? Some limits on the power of weapons? Some limits on the rights of those with mental problems?

    There isn’t a, to choose a perhaps inappropriate metaphor, silver bullet to this. Gun legislation by itself won’t work. Changes in mental patients’ rights won’t work. And how do we change our culture (if you think that’s the cause)?

    But maybe a middle ground can be found where all sides give in a bit. Limit the power of some weapons and ammunition. Limit the privacy right of those with mental problems.

  24. I’m not particularly knowledgeable about all this, but it seems to me that years ago, there was less of a thing about intervening and having people committed. I think that if you examine the roots of that, you’ll find your answer.

  25. Laura, over the years many people, especially liberals, worked to get laws changed so that mentally ill people did NOT have to be committed. That was against their civil rights, after all. Didn’t matter about the civil rights of the people they may have harmed when allowed to live on their own or out on the streets.

  26. Dr. Krauthammer is a board-certified psychiatrist, and I’ve heard a very good one. Dr. Kieth Ablow, another psychiatrist who regularly appears on FNC, is full of himself. If his face shows up on the telly I change the channel.

    many people, especially liberals, worked to get laws changed so that mentally ill people did NOT have to be committed.

    That’s a bit too simplistic, Carol. “Mentally ill” does not mean “potentially violent”. I served a short time of my medical training in a state-run mental institution and most of those people really didn’t deserve or need to be there. They have rights and we have a duty to insure those rights are protected. Perhaps the pendulum has swung too far the other way, but “one size fits all” isn’t right.

  27. ‘Do something…” is the charge of the emotional, but illogical audience. It’s understandable, but not reasonable for policy decisions.

    We need real regulations and help, not feel good pretend things, that don’t actually address the issue or solve the problem.

  28. “Of the 12 deadliest shootings in U.S. history, six have taken place since 2007.”

    Is something going on out there? Or is this just a statistical cluster?

    Gun deaths have dropped enormously over the past four decades. But these mass shootings seem to be increasing.

    This is something I’d like to hear our media talk about.

  29. You were upset? That’s news to me.

    Justifiably. You got a problem with that?

  30. “Bushwhacker” sounds better.

  31. Ooops – wrong thread. Sue me.

  32. Spdavid, I live about a half hour from Virginia Tech and that massacre STILL gets coverage damn near every day.

  33. I guess this is as good a place as any. Make it a class action. http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html

  34. ^ That’s a terrifying article.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 231 other followers

%d bloggers like this: