A year into his tenure at the top of CNN, besieged CEO Chris Licht is out. This news follows a year of missteps and, most recently, an egregiously long Atlantic hit piece in which Licht was dissected in a manner typically reserved for presidential candidates.
He never had a chance. Licht was dropped into a newsroom in crisis with a fundamentally different vision for the organization than most of his staff – worse, a fundamentally different vision of journalism. Licht’s tumultuous tenure at the helm culminated in last week’s brutal takedown. All told, the saga at CNN is indicative of a problem plaguing American society.
Licht’s organizational fumbles, beyond a doubt, are catastrophic. Perhaps it was the ill-fated “CNN This Morning” show or the disastrous Trump town hall last month that firmly sank the executive (notwithstanding last week’s disastrous profile), but the same inclination spurred both decisions: Licht’s agenda has been “balancing” CNN’s coverage; CNN mainstays had no interest in their new boss’ idea of neutrality.
CNN’s attempt to be neutral in a world of Trump
To anyone on the right, and especially devotees of former President Donald Trump, Licht’s perspective requires no explanation. It is simply accepted as fact that CNN is a biased propaganda outfit.
To the left, though, any overtures rightward are departures from journalistic integrity, a betrayal of the truth itself or cynical placations of the “MAGA Republicans.” That last group, of course, being engineers to the death of American democracy. Such breathless and hyperbolic coverage was CNN’s staple for nearly a decade – coverage emblematic of how CNN “lost its way,” according to The Atlantic.
An idea for CNN:After devastating Chris Licht profile, CNN should report only on its own drama!
Accounts much earlier in Licht’s tenure expose the same tensions. Much of the public, and seemingly most of CNN, believe that impartial coverage of Trump and the movement he created is impossible, as anything but robust opposition enables a threat to journalism and, more broadly, democracy itself.
Licht’s ambition, meanwhile, since his hiring last May, was to recreate CNN as a neutral forum for both sides.
There are two intractable versions of reality at work – or rather, decidedly not at work – in CNN’s newsroom. One that believes honest journalism requires providing a platform to all sides, and the other that believes honest journalism requires denying that platform to peddlers of misinformation, threats to democracy, etc.
Seemingly, Licht and a few compatriots were the only disciples of the former at CNN.
From Day One, for this reason, Licht was condemned to failure. Even a competent executive – not a descriptor The Atlantic would apply to Licht – could not bridge the gap between two opposed conceptions of reality. CNN’s chief and staff were speaking different languages, and nobody seemed particularly interested in hiring a translator.
CNN’s drama is an example of America’s own irreconcilable divide
The drama unfolding in CNN’s newsroom might be amusing to the casual observer, but consider the implications for the country at large. The same irreconcilable divide that tore CNN’s newsroom asunder for the past year is apparent in any number of national debates.
One side is insistent upon putting its thumb on the scale of what should be neutral discourse. The obsession of CNN staffers with whether they should “platform” certain politicians betrays the point.
It is not the business of CNN producers to decide whether a duly elected politician is worth “platforming.” Nor is it the role of prominent cultural and economic powers to use their influence to sway active political debates.
Who’s running for president?Field of delusional also-rans will make Trump the GOP nominee.
There are no more level playing fields in our national discourse, but perhaps there was none to begin with. Licht, his multitudinous missteps notwithstanding, attempted to build one. Because of this mission, he faced internal dissent and insurrection from the very beginning.
Regardless of his apparent failure at CNN, few are subject to national humiliation à la Licht’s immolation in The Atlantic.
The brutality of Licht’s Atlantic profile was unwarranted
The Atlantic spares nary a detail in its takedown of Licht, from salacious particulars of his workout routine to awkwardness at company dinners. Licht is quoted at rambling length on his strategy for running the company.
Brutal profiles are a dime a dozen, but even absent sympathy for Licht, this article is no less than gratuitously cruel in its disassembly of his term at CNN. What sin did Licht commit to warrant such blistering condemnation? There are plenty of blundering executives in this country, but only one of them – the one who pledged to make CNN conservative-friendly – earned an ignominious Atlantic feature.
The question that resounds throughout The Atlantic’s manifesto-length rebuke is why Licht participated at all. Licht’s difficulties at CNN have been thoroughly documented and require no repetition here (there’s a 15,000-word article if you’re sufficiently interested), but perhaps the worst decision he made was allowing an ax-wielding reporter unfettered access to the newsrooms and boardrooms of his company, not to mention his own brain.
Why did Licht agree?
The CEO, at war with his own company and fighting a losing battle for its culture, felt he could trust an external reporter more than his staffers. The Atlantic piece portrays Licht as distrustful, if not paranoid, assuming some of his staffers and the industry at large were out to get him.
The feeding frenzy that followed last week’s profile is strong evidence in Licht’s favor. If not rooting for his demise, the media industry was more than content to make an example of him. Both within the company and without, Licht was surrounded by opponents. Opponents of his style, his vision for the company and his quest to create a CNN free from liberal bias.
Criticism of an errant executive is in many cases, as here, well-deserved. However, Licht’s over-the-top punishment in the national media serves as a cautionary tale to those who would seek the middle ground in today’s America: Save your breath.
Rodge Reschini, a summer intern with USA TODAY Opinion, is a rising senior at Cornell University. He’s the editor-in-chief of the Cornell Review. Follow him on Twitter:@r_reschini
