I do not subscribe to the advocacy journalism school. It's not who I am and not who CNN wants me to be.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I'm not an advocacy journalist - that's not what I do. My role in journalism is to be able to engage the most interesting people with the best ideas.
While the rest of the cable news world moved to opinion, CNN allowed me to stay true to my hard-news roots and supported me with a true commitment to old-school journalism.
I'm very committed to and interested in CNN's journalism and our magazines and our movie studio, not just HBO, where I grew up. But I do have a fondness for subscription television.
You're required to be outspoken in journalism, and in television you're exposed anyway, because everyone watches it.
All advocacy is, at its core, an exercise in empathy.
It's like I say to young people who ask me about going into journalism: If you want to be loved, don't go into this business.
The voice I've chosen to turn to is that of NPR. With a reputation for some of the finest journalism in the country, the nonprofit organization is renowned for its unbiased stance - to the point that it's been accused of being both conservative and liberal.
The Congressional leaders set the agenda for journalism; it's not the other way around.
I never, ever have seen media this way. It's almost indescribable. Making up stories, refusing to run real stories. It's making themselves look like utter fools. There's no journalism, there is no media. There's pure, full-fledged advocacy here.
I believe that 'advocacy journalism' is not an oxymoron. If that means that I'm going to disrupt the cable, partisan fracas of obsession over what this means from left and right, then so be it. I will be disruptive of it.