CNN recently faced criticism for refusing to air President Trump's prime-time address, a decision that has sparked debate about the network's handling of the president's speech.
According to CNN's resident media reporter, the network "monitored" the speech and decided what was newsworthy, then "contextualized" the speech for their audience.
This explanation has been met with skepticism, particularly in light of CNN's past handling of more sensitive topics, such as the Russia collusion hoax.
By refusing to air the speech, CNN effectively told American voters that the network would decide when they hear from the President of the United States, rather than allowing voters to hear directly from their elected leader.
This decision has sparked outrage, with some questioning the network's commitment to democracy and free speech.
CNN's explanation for not airing the speech, which cited concerns about the potential danger of airing the president's address without knowing what he would say, has been widely criticized as misleading and hypocritical.
Other major liberal media outlets, including ABC, NBC, and MSNBC, also passed on the president's prime-time address, despite its newsworthiness.
The network's admission that some executives felt it would be "dangerous" to air the speech without knowing what the president would say has raised questions about the network's willingness to censor the president's message.
CNN's actions have been seen as an attempt to shield the public from the president's words, rather than allowing them to form their own opinions based on the information provided.
The network's commitment to democracy and free speech has been called into question, with some arguing that the network's actions are a threat to the principles of a free and open society.
The controversy surrounding CNN's decision has sparked a wider debate about the role of media in a democratic society and the importance of allowing voters to hear directly from their elected leaders.
