CNN host Michael Smerconish spoke with former cable news executives Phil Griffin, who ran MSNBC from 2008 to 2021, and Jeff Zucker, who ran CNN from 2013 to 2022, for an in-depth conversation on the state of media today and its impact on political polarization.
The conversation took place at the Un-Convention, held last week in Philadelphia, billed as “an exploration of political reforms to improve our election systems and policy ideas to govern a divided country.”
At one point during the fascinating conversation, Smercornish grilled both Griffin and Zucker about their network’s limited coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop ahead of the 2020 election – a topic now used by the right to declare the media both un-trustworthy and in the pocket of the Democrats.
“I think that the Hunter laptop was worthy of more airing than it received right before the election,” Smerconish began, setting up his question.
“Either of you agrees with me on that? Do you regret? How about if I ask you this way, specifically, do you regret not dealing with it before the election?” he then asked Zucker.
“Well, I mean, I think I think we, the question is, we did deal with it. But to the degree that, you know, you would have thought was appropriate. I think the answer is in the final two weeks, you know, it was looked at. We did not know enough about it,” Zucker answered.
“There was not you know, there was not within two weeks of the election, the ability when the messenger on that story was Rudy Giuliani,” Zucker continued as the audience groaned, adding:
Okay. No, I mean but I mean, that’s the problem. It’s like you’re going to give a lot of legitimacy to Rudy Giuliani delivering, you know, he’s got the goods. So part of the issue with that story was who was delivering the goods? Okay. That’s one. That doesn’t mean that we didn’t look into it.
We did. We did look into it. But first of all, you know, with regard to the son of the candidate, you know, he was the son of the candidate. He wasn’t the candidate. The question that you’ll come back with is, well, but what role did the candidate play in his business dealings? You know, frankly, with ten days or two weeks to go, it was looked at by very credible organizations, including The Wall Street Journal —Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal — and they found nothing at that time.
Okay. So my point is, it’s easy to say we should have spent more time on that. Listen, do I think it’s legitimate to look at. Sure. Do I think that like it’s a legitimate criticism to say that in the ten days, 14 days prior to the election, you didn’t spend enough time on it? Not really.
“What do you think?” Smerconish then asked, turning to Griffin.
“He was never arrested. The Justice Department was looking into it, never reported it until he is the son of a candidate. I don’t think it’s a main story until that happens,” Griffin replied, adding:
Now, we looked into it. You know, NBC News did, Tom Winter and Ken DiLanian did a great job. They met with Rudy. He brought a couple of pages printed out from the so-called, from the, from the computer. They asked for a digital copy of it. They didn’t get it. But I don’t think it was a big story before the election because he was never found. He was never charged.
Zucker then jumped back in and turned the tables on Smercornish, asking, “Did you cover it?”
“Did I tell you not to cover it?” Zucker followed up as Smercornish answered.
“I regret it. I regret it,” Smerconish conceded after Zucker pushed a bit more.
“I talked about it, but I talked about it extensively on radio. But no, Jeff’s right. I didn’t. And I second guess myself now, I don’t think it’s a huge story, but I don’t think it’s a huge story. But I think I look bad by not talking about it at all. I should have said something about the damn issue. That’s what I’m talking about,” Smerconish argued.
“But you didn’t know all the facts at the time either,” noted Zucker.
“No, but I think that we looked partisan by not giving it some air,” Smerconish shot back.
“I don’t disagree with that. But I think you have to be careful to, just because somebody throws a smoke bomb into the arena… You know, I think listen, it is worth real examination. But, you know, in the 11 days prior to the election, it involves the son of a candidate, you know, who clearly has issues and troubles. You know, what is the extent to which you should do it? We reported on it, but we didn’t report on it to the degree that you’re saying you thought would have been proper. Okay. That’s fine,” Zucker concluded.
“Do you regret giving Trump as much air as you gave him in 2016?” hit back Smerconish.
“Of course I do. I’ve admitted this publicly,” Zucker replied as the conversation moved on to coverage of Trump.
Watch the full interview above.
Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com