Biden team provided pre-approved questions to radio hosts Andrea Lawful-Sanders and Earl Ingram before their interviews with President Joe Biden.
Both Lawful-Sanders and Ingram have resigned following the controversy.
Campaign spokesperson clarified that interviews are not conditioned on acceptance of these questions but noted hosts are free to ask their own.
Ingram was given a list of four questions in advance for his interview without negotiation.
Lawful-Sanders admitted to receiving pre-determined questions from the White House, violating WURD's practice of remaining independent.
In a recent controversy, it has been revealed that the Biden team provided pre-approved questions to several radio hosts before their interviews with President Joe Biden. Two of these radio hosts, Andrea Lawful-Sanders from WURD in Philadelphia and Earl Ingram from WMCS in Milwaukee, have come forward about the incident.
According to reports, Lawful-Sanders arranged and negotiated her interview with Biden independently without consultation or collaboration with WURD management. However, she admitted to receiving pre-determined questions from the White House which violates WURD's practice of remaining an independent media outlet accountable to its listeners.
Similarly, Ingram revealed that he was given a list of four questions in advance for his interview with Biden without negotiation. The interviews took place after Biden's debate performance, where he struggled to complete sentences and press his case against Trump.
The practice of providing pre-approved questions to media outlets has drawn criticism as it goes against the standard journalistic independence. Both Lawful-Sanders and Ingram have resigned from their respective stations following the controversy.
Biden's campaign spokesperson, Lauren Hitt, clarified that they do not condition interviews on acceptance of these questions but noted that hosts are free to ask the questions they think will best inform their listeners.
The incident raises concerns about transparency and journalistic integrity in political media interactions.
WURD radio station has terminated the contract of Andrea Lawful-Sanders after she revealed receiving pre-approved questions from Biden’s team for a recent interview.
President Joe Biden’s team provided pre-approved questions to Philadelphia radio host Andrea Lawful-Sanders before her interview on WURD station.
Accuracy
Andrea Lawful-Sanders admitted approving four questions from eight provided by Biden’s team for her interview on WURD station.
Andrea Lawful-Sanders resigned in a mutual agreement following the controversy.
It is common for political communications staff to provide suggested topics for media appearances, but use of specific screened questions has drawn criticism.
Accuracy
President Biden’s team provided pre-approved questions to Philadelphia radio host Andrea Lawful-Sanders before her interview on WURD station.
Andrea Lawful-Sanders arranged and negotiated the interview independently without consultation or collaboration with WURD management.
Andrea Lawful-Sanders arranged and negotiated the interview independently without consultation or collaboration with WURD management.
Biden recorded two radio interviews after his debate against Trump, one with Lawful-Sanders on WURD and the other with Earl Ingram.
Accuracy
President Biden’s team provided pre-approved questions to Philadelphia radio host Andrea Lawful-Sanders before her interview on WURD station.
Andrea Lawful-Sanders approved four questions from eight provided by Biden’s team for her interview on WURD station.
Deception
(30%)
The article reports that the radio host interviewed President Biden with questions provided by his campaign, which goes against the station's practice of remaining an independent media outlet. This is a clear example of selective reporting as it only reports details that support the author's position and ignores the fact that other news outlets may also engage in this practice. The article does not disclose any peer-reviewed studies or retracted facts to support its claims.
But mainstream media should do its own introspection to explore how they have lost the trust of so many Americans, Black Americans chief among them.
The interview featured pre-determined questions provided by the White House, which violates our practice of remaining an independent media outlet accountable to our listeners.
President Joe Biden’s campaign provided approved questions to two radio hosts for his interviews after his faltering debate performance.
Biden argued that much is at stake for democracy, freedom, economy and Black voters in the election during his interview with Earl Ingram.
Accuracy
Biden's appearances on Black radio shows in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania were his first chances to answer questions and discuss record post-debate.
WURD and Lawful-Sanders mutually agreed to part ways due to the pre-determined questions provided by the White House.
Deception
(30%)
The article reports that the Biden campaign provided approved questions to two radio hosts for their interviews with President Biden. This is an example of selective reporting as it only reports details that support the author's position and omits information about Trump's campaign doing the same thing. The article also implies deception by stating 'What to know about the 2024 Election ... AP’s Role: The Associated Press is the most trusted source of information on election night, with a history of accuracy dating to 1848.' This statement is not factual and can be seen as an attempt to manipulate emotions and create a sense of trust in the article.
The Biden campaign provided lists of approved questions to two radio hosts who did the first interviews with him after his faltering debate performance
What to know about the 2024 Election ... AP’s Role: The Associated Press is the most trusted source of information on election night, with a history of accuracy dating to 1848.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article reports that the Biden campaign provided approved questions to two radio hosts for their interviews with President Biden. This is an example of an appeal to authority fallacy, as the hosts were not required to ask these questions and could have asked their own. The article also mentions that one of the hosts, Andrea Lawful-Sanders, had received a list of eight questions from which she approved four. However, it is not clear if this was also the case for Earl Ingram or if he received exactly four questions as stated. Therefore, I cannot give a score higher than 85 due to the potential for ambiguity and lack of explicit confirmation that both hosts received identical sets of pre-approved questions.
They gave me the exact questions to ask.
The interview featured pre-determined questions provided by the White House.
Bias
(95%)
The article reports that the Biden campaign provided approved questions to two radio hosts for their interviews with President Biden. While it is common practice for interviewees to suggest topics they would prefer, providing a set list of specific questions goes beyond this and can be seen as an attempt to control the narrative and shape the interview in a particular way. This practice can be considered monetary bias if it is done to secure favorable coverage or avoid unfavorable questions.
The interviews had been arranged and negotiated by Lawful-Sanders independently without knowledge, consultation or collaboration with WURD management. But the interview featured pre-determined questions provided by the White House.
President Biden's team provided questions to Earl Ingram, a local radio host in Milwaukee, for his interview with the president.
Another local radio host, Andrea Lawful-Sanders from Philadelphia, also received questions from Biden’s team before her interview.
Accuracy
Andrea Lawful-Sanders received pre-approved questions from Biden’s team before her interview.
Biden campaign spokesperson Lauren Hitt stated it’s ‘not at all an uncommon practice for interviewees to share topics they would prefer''
Deception
(30%)
The article reports on two local radio hosts who received questions from Biden's team before their interviews with him. This is an example of selective reporting as the article only reports details that support the author's position, implying that this practice is problematic and raises concerns about Biden's fitness to lead. However, the article does not disclose any information about whether this practice is common or if it was done with conditions attached. The author also makes no attempt to hide his opinion on the matter.
Another local radio host confirmed that he received questions from President Biden’s team ahead of his interview with the U.S. leader.
The CNN anchor also pointed out that the questions the Philadelphia host asked were ‘essentially the same’ as those in Biden’s interview with Ingram.
Fallacies
(85%)
The author reports on two local radio hosts who received questions from the Biden team before their interviews with the president. This is an example of an appeal to authority fallacy, as the fact that the Biden team provided questions does not necessarily mean that those questions are valid or unbiased. The author does not explicitly state that any false statements were made, but by reporting on this practice without criticizing it, they may be implying that it is a normal and acceptable practice.
][The CNN anchor] pointed out that the questions the Philadelphia host asked were 'essentially the same' as the ones in Biden's interview with Ingram.[/]
[Biden campaign spokesperson] Lauren Hitt told Fox News Digital that it's 'not at all an uncommon practice for interviewees to share topics they would prefer.'
Bias
(80%)
The author does not express any bias towards or against President Biden in the article. However, the practice of providing questions to interviewers beforehand can be seen as an attempt to control the narrative and potentially influence the outcome of the interview. This is a common practice in journalism and is not inherently biased, but it can create an appearance of bias if not disclosed properly.
It's just that if the White House is trying now to prove the vim, vigor, acuity of the president
]The White House is trying now to prove the vim, vigor, acuity of the president[
