The attempted bombing of a New York City protest sparked outrage, but the initial coverage from some media outlets drew even fiercer criticism. A columnist sharply condemned the downplaying of a dangerous act, questioning the editorial direction of a major network.
CNN initially reported the incident involving two suspects as a situation where the lives of “two Pennsylvania teenagers” would “drastically change.” This phrasing, concerning the throwing of homemade bombs, was quickly walked back, with the network admitting its original statement “failed to reflect the gravity of the incident.”
The columnist described CNN’s initial response as “pathetic,” drawing a stark parallel to historical events. He likened it to reporting the attack on Pearl Harbor as a chance encounter between sailors on a warm day, questioning what CNN even stood for.
He emphasized the potential for devastation, stating the situation could have mirrored the Boston bombing in its impact. The columnist asserted these were deliberate acts of violence by individuals with extremist ideologies, aiming to harm Americans based on disagreement.
Criticism wasn’t limited to CNN. The New York Times initially described the projectiles as “smoking jars of metal and fuses,” a description later revised to acknowledge they were homemade bombs. ABC News further fueled the controversy by referring to the suspects as “activists.”
The incident unfolded during a counterprotest against an anti-Islam demonstration outside Gracie Mansion. Authorities detained a suspect attempting to detonate an improvised explosive device, highlighting the real and immediate threat posed.
The columnist argued that a complete overhaul is necessary for CNN to restore its credibility. He used the analogy of a struggling football program, suggesting a change in leadership and personnel is essential for a turnaround, anticipating shifts following a recent acquisition.
The CEO of the acquiring company stated plans to maintain CNN and CBS News as distinct brands, promising to uphold their editorial independence. However, the initial handling of this incident has already raised serious questions about journalistic standards and responsible reporting.
