doing-ethics-in-media-logo.png

CNN’s Sanchez runs his mouth, loses his job: Is that ethical?

October 5, 2010

CNN news anchor Rick Sanchez was fired on Friday after making some controversial comments about the network and comedian Jon Stewart, the New York Times reported.

Appearing for an interview on Pete Dominick’s satellite radio show on Sept. 30, Sanchez said his network, like the rest of the media, was run by Jewish liberals who didn’t want him to succeed. He went on to say that Stewart held the same belief and was a “bigot.”

Stewart, who is the host of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, has mocked Sanchez at least 20 times on his show in the past five years, the Times later reported.

Sanchez was the host of “Rick’s List” during a two-hour time slot on weekday afternoons on CNN. He was also filling in during the 8 p.m. (EST) time slot for Campbell Brown, who left the network two months ago due to low ratings.

Dominick’s blog published a summary of the 55-minute interview that included some of Sanchez’s most blasting allegations.

“Elite, Northeast establishment liberals… deep down, when they look at a guy like me, they see a guy automatically who belongs in the second tier, and not the top tier,” Sanchez, a Cuban-American, said. “I think to some extent Jon Stewart and [Stephen] Colbert are the same way. I think Jon Stewart’s a bigot.”

Sanchez went on to say that Stewart was prejudiced, but Dominick countered his argument, pointing out that Stewart was Jewish and therefore probably knew about being a minority, too.

“Yeah, very powerless people,” Sanchez said with a sarcastic laugh. “I’m telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart, and to imply that somehow they — the people in this country who are Jewish — are an oppressed minority? Yeah.”

After the interview, many people, including Dominick’s blog reporter, Brian Dominick, said Sanchez had crossed the line.

“That’s right, CNN anchor Rick Sanchez basically suggested that Jews have run the media,” Brian Dominick said on Pete’s blog.

Friday, the day after the interview, CNN released a statement that said, “Rick Sanchez is no longer with the company. We thank Rick for his years of service and we wish him well.” The network did not include a reason for Sanchez’s departure.

Sanchez wasn’t the only high-ranking person fired at CNN recently. A week before, CNN fired its former president, Jonathan Klein, after the network’s ratings continued to fall significantly behind Fox News and MSNBC.

In its report of Sanchez’s firing, the Times said that Klein had actually promoted Sanchez to his latest two-hour time slot.

Speaking of ratings, Sanchez’s were not good either. The Miami-Herald reported in August that Sanchez’s ratings were lower than his predecessor’s – 40 percent lower, in fact, than Brown’s during the previous year.

“Sanchez’s tiny numbers were a major factor in CNN finishing in fifth place among news networks in the demos on [the night of Aug. 9], lagging behind not only Fox News, MSNBC and CNN’s corporate cousin, but CNBC — a business-news channel that loses almost its entire audience at night,” David L. Wolper said.

Sanchez’s afternoon show will be replaced by “CNN Newsroom,” the Washington Post reported. His temporary 8 p.m. time slot will be filled by CNN’s new show “Parker Spitzer,” which had already been scheduled to start on Monday.

ANALYSIS

To put it plainly: Rick Sanchez should have known better. Complaining about your employer on national radio while making racist remarks is an incredibly quick way to snag yourself a pink slip.

However, the ethical issues are deeper than Sanchez’s stupidity. The major question that arises is whether CNN made the correct decision, ethically, when it fired Sanchez. There’s no doubt that he legally had the right to say what he said. He’s protected by the First Amendment, after all.

As a journalist, Sanchez did something unethical: he strayed from his loyalty to his viewers (the public), his news organization and his profession.

Loyalty, as the textbook says, should be based on a correct vision of what is worthwhile. It is one of several values that play a role in ethical decision-making. For journalists, loyalty means commitment to their readers and viewers by providing fair and accurate reporting that is in the public’s interest – not the journalist’s self-interest.

In a news media dominated by partisan networks, CNN has branded itself as an unbiased news source. It, along with most other journalists, has deemed nonpartisanship to be worthwhile. News anchors and reporters are not supposed to publically propel their self-interest or any type of political or religious interest.

Sanchez was spewing out statements fueled with religious and political sentiments. Even if he is not truly anti-Semitic (he said later in the interview that he has Jewish friends), his allegations were insensitive and based on stereotypes – which is something that also seriously conflicts with a journalist’s loyalty to diversity. Additionally, while his statements were not propagating a religious interest, they were putting down a religious group.

One of the biggest problems with Sanchez’s allegations is that they were not backed up with facts – which gave the impression that he was just picking a fight. For example, when Dominick asked Sanchez for specific reasons why he thought Stewart was a bigot, he couldn’t come up with any.

Furthermore, although Sanchez was not appearing on his own show when he made his comments, he was still presenting information to an audience – specifically, an audience who knew he was a news anchor. He compromised his loyalty to the public for his own self-interest: to fire back at those who had personally slighted him.

Sanchez is allowed to have his own opinions. But he should not publically voice his opinions when his network values and promotes objectivity. Doing so could now cause viewers to question Sanchez’s objectivity when reporting on issues regarding officials in the media, Stewart or Judaism. Additionally, objectivity is a component of truth and is based on the presentation of facts – not opinions. Sanchez couldn’t provide any facts to back up his accusatory statements, and as such, appears to not be telling the entire truth. So, not only has he violated the value of being objective, but he may have also violated the value of being truthful. Ironically, Dominic’s blog said that Sanchez started off the interview by saying that anchors on Fox News and MSNBC were not being objective and not “really doing journalism.”

Sanchez’s comments reflected badly on him, as well as on CNN and the media “profession.” By calling CNN executives (as well as all news executives in general) “elitist” and “liberal,” he gave the public a reason to question the network’s loyalty to the public and its overall objectivity. As a news anchor for the network, he held a social responsibility to represent his organization it in a respectful and objective way. If he truly had such a problem with the network and believed it was liberal and elitist, he should have left his job. However, instead of being loyal to his employer/profession or quitting, Sanchez chose to harm its reputation in a national medium because of his personal grudge. Not exactly the best way to be a watchdog or a whistle-blower.

So was CNN right to fire Sanchez? Yes. He broke his loyalty to his viewers, the network and his profession. Plus, he compromised journalistic values, including objectivity and truth.

– By Aisha Mahmood

Share this post

Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Associate Professor

Department of Journalism and Creative Media at the University of Alabama.

© Chris Roberts 2022