In response to Alan Dershowitz, retired Harvard law professor and frequent guest on the show who called him out for not disclosing his relationship with Cohen, Hannity said the relationship was "minimal" and "minor". The next day he declared to have "occasional, brief conversations.... about legal questions I had or I was looking for input and perspective", but that he'd never been represented legally by Cohen. While I believe Hannity should have divulged that he had a personal connection to Cohen before defending him on air, but that the privacy of all involved parties (i.e. Hannity, Toensing, Cohen, and Sekulow) should be respected unless there is reason to suspect foul play. Do you believe Hannity's claims not to have been legally involved with Cohen? What are the implications of Hannity's indirect links to Trump? How much right to privacy should Hannity hold in this situation?
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/18/603471930/besides-cohen-other-trump-connected-attorneys-linked-to-sean-hannity
4 comments:
I think the fact that Hannity has defended Cohen on air is fairly concerning. While much of TV news comes from a source that leans one way or another, a political commentator influencing people with his voice on a topic that he has a personal interest in is disconcerting. It's not like we're expecting Fox News to be completely objective — just as CNN, etc. lean toward the left, Fox appeals to a conservative audience —- but this takes it to a whole new level. As far as how much I believe Hannity's claims, I'm not sure I can provide any insight, as this is still a matter under investigation.
I agree with Zack. I don't exactly expect Fox News to be unbiased, but I think that it is clearly unethical for Hannity to have these conflicts of interest without disclosing them.
I mostly agree with Michael and Zack. While I too don't expect Fox News to be a totally unbiased sources of information, and I would generally consider Hannity's show to be an opinion show, I still would expect the organization, and Hannity himself, to be ethical journalist. In my mind this includes disclosing any connection to a story before, during, and after reporting on it. I also think that Hannity has no right to privacy in this situation as he is a public figure and it is necessary that the audience is told of his connection to this issue before he comments on it.
As for Hannity's claims that Cohen did not represent him, I think that is a false statement. Hannity has made many false statements in the past on his show, especially regarding matters related to Trump, and considering the other cases Cohen took, I understand why Hannity would want to deny any involvement with him. I also think Hannity's claims are not credible because Cohen told a judge that Hannity was his client, and I think Cohen is less likely to lie to a judge than Hannity is to lie to his audience.
Of course the potential implications of this case are that Hannity had an affair, consensual or otherwise, and enlisted Cohen's help in concealing it. I haven't looked into any claims against Hannity, but I would not be entirely surprised if they were credible, given the position of his employer and the culture under which he worked.
Post a Comment