O’Brien will anchor a new "conversational ensemble program" that explores top issues of the day while opening the conversation to people from all walks of life. O’Brien will continue to be a special correspondent for long-form documentaries at CNN.
“I couldn’t be more eager to return to daily news, to bring conversation and context to CNN viewers in the morning. I welcome the opportunity to give voice to people who aren’t often heard, and stories that are sometimes overlooked,” says O’Brien. “I love telling people’s stories, and I’m looking forward to bringing the perspective, heart and storytelling that have worked well in our documentaries to a morning audience”
Since joining CNN in 2003, O’Brien has reported breaking news from around the globe—including the Japanese earthquake and tsunami, hurricane Katrina, and the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. In addition, she has produced award-winning documentaries, including the acclaimed Black in America, Latino in America and Muslim in America. Earlier this year she was part of a CNN team that won an Emmy Award for their reporting of the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti.
O’Brien came to CNN from NBC, where she anchored the network’s Weekend Today show from 1999-2003. She was named Journalist of the Year by the National Association of Black Journalists in 2010. That same year she launched a personal foundation with her husband, the Soledad O’Brien and Brad Raymond Foundation to send underprivileged youth to and through college.
 |
| Banfield |
 |
| Sambolin |
Ashleigh Banfield and Zoraida Sambolin will anchor from 5-7am ET, kicking off the new CNN morning block with a new program covering a broad spectrum of the day’s news from two highly personable and passionate journalists.
1 comment:
I see that you have a new show. Congratulations. My comments below are intended to help you find success by contributing something truly valuable and unique to the media.
This starts by letting your guests TALK and keeping your agenda to yourself. It seems like you are working an agenda rather than trying to understand and clarify the points your guests are trying to make.
This morning I watched you for the first time. Your guests were trying to respond to Newt's comments about food stamps and paychecks. You kept drilling to Newt's "multiple comments saying the same thing" as if each was verified as a racial attack. You DID NOT give your panel a chance to explore different interpretations or nuances that might make Newt's words NOT racial.
This is not a testimony about Newt being right, although I do believe that the attacks about him are based on twisting words and taking things out of context. I suggesting that as a professional interviewer that you would be more enjoyable to watch if you would facilitate dialog rather than continually talk over or "correct" your guests. I know that these behaviors are the norm for media hosts, but that does not make them effective. We, your viewers, are fed up with this approach. I am a busy person... I don't have time to listen to any news host use her guests to push her own agenda. Its boring, frustrating, and unproductive.
HERE is what I am waiting for the news media to do. Let go of the witch hunt trying to prove Newt has not changed and start looking at his behavior. I watched Newt stick by his "no negative" pact until the forced him into counter attacks. Instead of the media focusing on Newt's resolve, they could have focused on how well he keeping up and, perhaps, pointing out how ugly the others were getting and .
The media has a chance to change history or keep it the same. If, in this case, they would have highlighted how much could be gained by avoiding the negative attacks rather than making it about Newt's resolve, something good might have come of it. Instead, one of the ugliest campaigns ever has manifested.
CNN's own Wolf Blitzer set a not so clever trap for Newt when he asked him a direct question about voting for Ron Paul and then called his answer an attack. From that point on, it was clear that Newt was damned if he did and damned if he didn't.
It was so very disappointing and did, in fact, create a very damaging outcome for the Republican party. Let me say that I was not impressed with Wolf and his antics any more than I am left uninspired by your handling of the topic of "paychecks vs. foodstamps". You totally missed an opportunity to explore a very hopeful, UNRACIST concept and turned it into something it was not. Shame on you.
I hope that over time you consider the benefits of authentic dialog where controversy can be looked at clearly and with integrity. Then I might get some value watching your show.
Post a Comment