The Dark Side of CNN's Hiring Practices: Who Are the Worst Employees and Why Did They Get Hired?

Over the years, CNN has faced numerous controversies regarding its hiring practices. One of the most notable and concerning aspects has been the questionable prudence in appointing individuals who have either been overtly partisan or those who haveiled catalysts to propagate misinformation. This article delves into the crux of these hiring controversies, focusing on the most controversial hires and the reasons behind their appointments.

The Trump/Russian Collusion Sting

Perhaps the most prominent and damning evidence of CNN's missteps in its editorial policy is the persistent propagation of the "Trump/Russian collusion" theory, which has been widely discredited. For two long years, CNN actively pushed this narrative, leading to a significant backlash from a considerable portion of its audience. This storyline was not only factually flawed but also driven by a partisan agenda rather than journalistic integrity.

According to Robert Mueller's findings, no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia ever took place. The accusers' narrative was purely speculative and politically motivated. This prolonged spread of false information has been a turning point in the credibility of CNN. The public's trust in media credibility has been eroded, and CNN's audience base has gradually diminished.

The Appointment of Sarah Isgur Flores

A case in point is Sarah Isgur Flores, who was appointed to coordinate CNN's 2020 coverage. This move was seen as highly problematic given her background in political campaigning and no substantial experience in journalism. Funnily enough, just a few years before, Isgur Flores had been critical of CNN itself, describing it as the 'Clinton News Network.'

Her appointment to such a crucial role brought additional scrutiny to CNN's hiring practices. Critics highlighted her lack of journalistic experience and her past roles in the Republican Party. Her mission, to fulfill CNN's 2020 coverage needs, seemed to align more with political agenda-setting than factual reporting.

Partisanship vs. Fact-Checking

The appointment of Sarah Isgur Flores serves as a stark reminder of the inherent risks associated with prioritizing partisanship over journalistic integrity. CNN's decision to hire individuals with no journalistic background but significant political experience highlights a systemic flaw in the decision-making process. The lack of thorough vetting and the reliance on political connections have arguably led to the circulation of unverified information and the perpetuation of misinformation.

It is not uncommon for CNN's coverage to be drowned in a sea of partisan headlines. This trend has become a hallmark of the network's reporting, often overshadowing nuanced and balanced perspectives. The persistent focus on the Trump/Russian collusion story is just one example of how CNN's editorial choices sometimes skew towards sensationalism and partisanship rather than factual reporting.

Conclusion

While CNN continues to be a major player in the media landscape, the controversies surrounding problematic hires and the propagation of misinformation cast a considerable shadow over its credibility. The appointment of Sarah Isgur Flores and the persistent coverage of the discredited Trump/Russian collusion narrative are not isolated incidents but rather symptomatic of a broader approach that prioritizes sensationalism and political influence over factual reporting and journalistic responsibility.

The public's trust in media is too valuable to be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. CNN must address these issues head-on and make a concerted effort to rebuild its reputation by ensuring rigorous fact-checking, holding itself accountable to the highest standards of journalistic integrity, and distancing itself from political agendas.