By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
Late yesterday, CNN announced that Lou Dobbs was stepping down from his position as “advocacy anchor” of the network in order to “seek a more activist role.” CNN announced that Dobbs would now “carry his banner of advocacy journalism elsewhere.” Although CNN’s press release described the parting as “amicable,” news reports covering Dobbs’ departure cited recent tensions between Dobbs and CNN, relating in part to Dobbs’ on-air perpetuation of the widely-discredited theories of the “Birthers,” who questioned President Obama’s U.S. citizenship. Advocacy Journalism? Advocacy, perhaps. But journalism? It was surprising that CNN actually used this term in its’ press release. What exactly is an “advocacy journalist?” Given that a common definition of journalism is writing or reporting of news or facts in a direct presentation without interpretation, and that journalists work hard to present both sides of a particular issue, isn’t “Advocacy Journalism” a contradiction in terms?
We should be proud that AILA was the first organization in the immigrant rights community to stand up to Dobbs. Initially Dobbs staffers would tape interviews with AILA spokespeople and use only snippets of the interview to support Dobbs’ own views. Then AILA made clear to Dobbs and his producers that we would not appear on his program unless it was on a live segment. Since such a segment could not be edited and manipulated, Dobbs refused. AILA’s coalition partners followed suit, with the result that over the past 22 months, Dobbs had virtually no access to real immigration expertise. As the New York Times and The Washington Post continued to run articles discrediting Dobbs, the impact of Dobbs’ lack of access to our expertise was keenly felt—it came to a head when a representative from the office of CNN’s President called AILA to find out why Dobbs wasn’t using AILA as a resource—then the “cat was out of the bag,” as it were.
Clearly CNN must have recognized that the constant ravings of an anti-immigrant demagogue can’t be good for its ratings—let alone its’ self-image as an independent news-reporting organization. Before we all breathe a collective sigh of relief, however, let’s look carefully at Dobbs’ parting words. Last night, he stated, “…[S]ome leaders in media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond the role here at CNN and to engage in constructive problem-solving, as well as to contribute positively to a better understanding of the great issues of our day. And to continue to do so in the most honest and direct language possible.” In light of Dobbs’ beliefs and how he has already “contributed” to the immigration debate thus far, these words take on a very ominous meaning. What might Dobbs do when he is no longer constrained, even minimally, by the boundaries of a credible news organization?
To get a sense of what might happen, we need only look at the career trajectory of one of Dobbs’ spiritual predecessors—similar in style if not his radical and irresponsible spewings—Father Charles Coughlin. Father Coughlin was a Canadian-born priest serving at Royal Oak, Michigan’s National Shrine of the Little Flower Church. One of the first political leaders to reach a mass audience through radio, Father Coughlin began his radio career as a staunch Roosevelt supporter. But, like Dobbs who claims he was radicalized by the events of September 11, Coughlin became disillusioned by the New Deal in the mid-1930’s and embarked on a campaign against “money changers” and the government, which in his view was “permitting a group of private citizens to create money.” It was not long before he was preaching out-and-out anti-Semitism, claiming that the Depression was caused by an “international conspiracy of Jewish bankers,” and that Jews (including Lenin and Stalin, both of whom, according to Coughlin, were Jewish) fomented the Russian Revolution in an effort to uproot Christianity in Russia. His magazine, “Social Justice,” also published anti-Semitic material; he began to endorse some of the policies of Hitler and Mussolini, and at a 1938 rally in the Bronx, gave a Nazi salute and stated “When we get through with the Jews in America, they’ll think the treatment they received in Germany was nothing.”
At the height of his popularity, Coughlin received more mail than FDR. When Coughlin temporarily lost his radio operating permit, he raised funds among his many supporters, purchased air time, and played recordings of his speeches. When it seemed that the government might actually try Coughlin for sedition, the Roman Catholic Church forced him to retire from his “advocacy” activities.
Those who really want to preach hate and perpetuate lies will always find a venue to do so. What will “Dobbs unleashed and unplugged” do?”He will clearly find another “Bully Pulpit,” whether it is another media outlet willing to air his rants or a run for public office, perhaps financed by those who pour their money into FAIR and the Center for Immigration Studies.Maybe we can take a minute to be thankful that Dobbs is no longer on CNN, since the victories of those who fight for immigrant rights are few and far between these days. But then let’s watch—and prepare—for his next move.
No, Daria, that's not what's happened here. I'll invite you to reread the article, because it's pretty clear that the author is simply reporting on a facet in a larger diamond, if you follow my metaphor. AILA's efforts to encourage unbiased reporting on immigration issues (i.e., reporting facts as OPPOSED to opinions) were not the sole reason Lou Dobbs stepped down from CNN, though they probably helped things along quite a bit. Most likely, it was his perpetuation of the views held by the widely-discredited "Birther" movement that led to his removal.
What's scary is that 26% of Americans believe it's completely inappropriate for our President to bow to other foreign leaders. THAT'S scary.
Doubtless Dobbs will be wearing his xenophobia like a sock at a nude beach….
AILA was successful in having a man lose his job because he did not agree with your opinion. Scary.
Dear Mr. Leopold:
I glad CNN did the right thing, and I see the point of your blog. However, it is ironic that you engage in the same type of demagoguery that you chastise Mr. Dobbs for.
You state that "[w]hen it seemed that the government might actually try Coughlin for sedition, the Roman Catholic Church forced him to retire from his “advocacy” activities. You imply that the Church agreed with Father Gallagher and only took action out of self-preservation interests. If you do honest nonbiased research, you will find that Roman Catholic Church did not approve of Father Coughlin. The Vatican, the Apostolic Delegation in Washington, D.C., and the archbishop of Cincinnati all wanted him silenced. However, only Coughlin's superior, Detroit Bishop Michael Gallagher, had the canonical authority to curb him, but Gallagher supported the "Radio Priest".
As it did in CNN case, it took sometime for the Church to properly address the Gallagher situation. I would imagine that Mr. Dobbs was a "headache" for CNN for some time, but for contractual and internal reasons it was not easy to get him off the network, just as the Church and many other organizations struggle to manage renegades within its ranks that cause a black eye.
Your are correct that misinformation fuels demagoguery, but we should all realize that we are all capable of doing so when we don't know what we are talking about.
Ms. Pelta,
I am concerned about your rhetoric in this blog. Sure, Lou Dobbs is a thorn in the side of those of us who advocate for more just immigration laws. Sure, Lou Dobbs frequently provided misinformation that no doubt led to xenophobia. Sure, Lou Dobbs gave a platform to hate groups. But, Lou Dobbs is not a Neo-Nazi and he hasn't demonostrated anti-semitic views. It is irresponsible to liken Lou Dobbs to Charles Coughlin, when references to the Holocaust carry with them such extreme gut reactions (and rightfully so).
The Holocaust was perhaps the most atrocious event of modern times (I use "perhaps" because there are countless other terrible happenings all around the world all the time — some of which we know, some of which we are only discovering, and some of which remain hidden). The Holocaust was, of course, nothing short of mass murder and large-scale terrorism. And in one way or another, the persecution that occurred at the hands of the Nazis motivates all of us who fight daily to protect those being tortured and those who have been tortured. The lessons learned from that terrible period in history guide us to more enlightened immigration and social policy.
Lou Dobbs does not advocate that unauthorized migrants be forced into concentration camps or exterminated. He is wrong in his world view, but he is not a Nazi, he is not a Neo-Nazi, and he is not Father Coughlin.
Just as it is irresponsible to compare President Obama's administration to that of Nazi Germany, it is irresponsible to compare Lou Dobbs to a Nazi admirer. This is especially true when we are on the right side of the debate. AILA must be careful and measured in its own rhetoric. We are a thoughtful organization, and, even if those who oppose our ideals do not, we consider the consequences of our statements before we make them. Our credibility enables us to do the good work that we do, and blogs like this one weaken that credibility.
Agreed! I'd always had issues with Dobbs at CNN, and, frankly, I'm surprised it took this long for him to leave. Granted, the idea of him "unleashed", as it were, is a little scary, but the very worst that could happen is him getting picked up by Fox News for their oh-so-well-informed lineup of "opinutainment" television. Until then, though, score one for our side!
About time CNN "deported" Dobbs. He is a true modern day minister of propaganda and hate. Without him polluting the airwaves, a comprehensive immigration reform in the near future becomes even more probable…