Staff Reports
CNN continues its relentless descent into chaos, and it appears to be dragging down everyone in its path. Following the November election and Trump’s unexpected victory, the network has been in a tailspin. Ratings have plummeted, and the internal turmoil has only escalated. Their recent defamation ruling, which proved they are guilty of spreading false information, was just icing on the cake. Now, with a planned round of layoffs that includes major shifts in programming, it’s hard to see how CNN can ever regain its footing in the media landscape.
One of the more curious figures amidst this encroaching darkness at CNN is Harry Enten, the data analyst who seems to have perfected the art of delivering uncomfortable truths. While many of his colleagues are busy engaging in narratives filled with emotionally charged opinions, Enten stands out as a beacon of actual data. Unfortunately for him, in an organization like CNN, the presentation of factual information often flies in the face of the prevailing agenda, and that could put his job in jeopardy.
As the last vestiges of objectivity at CNN, Enten has found himself increasingly at odds with the prevailing narrative pushed by the network’s pundits. His presence is akin to a breath of fresh air in a room filled with stale and overly heated rhetoric. This past November, during a discussion panel, he delivered insights from his own network indicating that Twitter, rather than being the echo chamber it is portrayed to be, might actually be the most ideologically balanced social media platform. His fellow panelists, lacking the ability to see past their bias, were left scrambling to rebut his claims. Such moments have become common as Enten’s data-centric approach consistently undermines the networks’ more emotional takes.
A particularly striking incident occurred during CNN’s self-indulgent anniversary coverage of the Capitol riot. While others wallowed in a celebration of faux outrage, Enten pointed out that a staggering majority of voters simply don’t connect Donald Trump to those events. Polling data showed that only a measly five percent considered Trump responsible, a number that serves as a massive thumb in the eye to CNN’s relentless focus on the subject. Enten’s ability to shine a light on such stark realities perhaps serves as a threat to the network’s narrative; it’s hard to maintain hysteria when cold, hard facts are thrown into the mix.
Enten’s data has exposed how the American public’s support for Trump’s immigration policies remains robust, with over 55 percent favoring the removal of illegal immigrants. CNN has often condemned such stances, so when Enten laid out the numbers alongside a 23-point rise in support since Biden took office, it was an inconvenient truth for a network banking on a different story. Each time he brings forth fact-based evidence that counters the majority opinion at CNN, the network finds itself in a compromised position.
https://t.co/GKIKoNPF9p
CNN continues to face significant challenges, including declining ratings and job cuts following the November election. The network has been criticized for its reporting, particularly regarding Donald Trump, leading to a defamation ruling against it.…— The America One News (@am1_news) January 29, 2025
In a striking turn, the façade of climate change hysteria was also challenged by Enten. While his colleagues claimed that recent California wildfires were directly tied to climate change, he showcased that public concern over climate itself had actually decreased as wildfire interest peaked. Furthermore, numerous long-standing predictions of doom from climate change have failed to sway many Americans, as survey data over the past three decades reveal a stagnation in belief. For an organization that thrives on sensationalism, such information poses an existential threat to its mission.
The reality is that CNN, facing dwindling ratings and a rapidly disillusioned audience, may not appreciate a voice like Enten’s that continuously chips away at its narrative. His insights do not just illuminate the contradictions in their reporting; they actively undermine the fear-mongering tactics that have become the hallmark of the network. While it is unclear whether Enten’s intuitive readings of public sentiment and data will lead to any substantial changes at CNN, one thing is for sure: a network that has built its identity around emotional narratives will not easily embrace the truth when it contradicts the comfortable lies it has told. As such, those who speak the truth there might need to keep their résumés at the ready.
