Tag Archives: media bias debate

Fmr MSNBC Analyst Crawford: Media ‘Playing into Dem Message’ That Tea Party Candidates Are ‘Insane’

Appearing as a guest on Sunday’s Reliable Sources on CNN, the Congressional Quarterly’s Craig Crawford – formerly an MSNBC political analyst – admitted that the mainstream media have “listen[ed] too much to the Democratic message” that the Tea Party movement will harm Republicans rather than Democrats in this year’s congressional elections. He further charged that the media are “playing into that Democratic message that these candidates are insane.” Crawford: Sometimes we’re wrong when we listen too much to the Democratic message. That’s the Democratic party message, that the Tea Party is bad for them [Republicans]. I think we should scrutinize that a bit more, be a little more skeptical of it. The other is that they’re all crazy. And that’s the trouble with focusing on all these statements and everything. We’re playing into that Democratic message that these candidates are insane. A bit earlier, after host Kurtz observed that the media do not “respect” Tea Party candidates and “some of us seem to be looking down our noses at these insurgents,” Crawford lamented: “Yeah, and I hate to see the mainstream media doing that because I certainly respect them and their politics. They have been very successful.” Crawford notably has a history of criticizing Republicans for charging that the media are biased against them in his book, “Attack the Messenger: How Politicians Turn You Against the Media.” Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Sunday, September 19, Reliable Sources on CNN: HOWARD KURTZ: Craig Crawford, let’s look at the political fallout. Whether we’re talking about Christine O’Donnell in Delaware or Joe Miller in Alaska or Sharron Angle in Nevada, these people went out and beat establishment candidates, often with not a lot of money. Shouldn’t journalists respect that? Instead there seems to be, well, this is mutual antagonism, we seem to be, some of us, I don’t want to include everybody, some of us seem to be looking down our noses at these insurgents and they don’t seem to be big fans of the mainstream media. CRAIG CRAWFORD, CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY: Yeah, and I hate to see the mainstream media doing that because I certainly respect them and they’re politics. They have been very successful. The thing about the Tea Party that strikes me is it’s very similar in particular their fiscal conservative views to the Perot movement. And this argument that they’re bad for Republicans doesn’t wash as much with me because at least they’re inside the Republican party. The Perot people were outside the party and much more damaging to Republicans. KURTZ: Craig, just briefly, what about this instant journalistic wisdom when these candidates, Christine O’Donnell being the latest, well, of course it hurts Republicans because they’re all going to lose in november, they’re too extreme, it’s one thing to win, you know, 30,000 votes in Delaware, another thing to win in state election. We’ve been wrong all year on some of these races. Could we be wrong again. CRAWFORD: Sometimes we’re wrong when we listen too much to the Democratic message. That’s the Democratic party message, that the Tea Party is bad for them [Republicans]. I think we should scrutinize that a bit more, be a little more skeptical of it. The other is that they’re all crazy. And that’s the trouble with focusing on all these statements and everything. We’re playing into that Democratic message that these candidates are insane. KURTZ, LAUGHING: Journalists, of course, are perfectly sane. We all know that.

Read more from the original source:
Fmr MSNBC Analyst Crawford: Media ‘Playing into Dem Message’ That Tea Party Candidates Are ‘Insane’

At NYT, Kate Zernike’s Clueless Advice to GOP Candidates: ‘Enlist (Tea Partiers), but Avoid Speeches on the Constitution’

It’s almost tempting to just run a few paragraphs of Kate Zernike’s latest item in the New York Times and simply have folks take their rips, but a bit of background would be helpful. Zernike (pictured at right) is the Times reporter who seems to have made it her mission to somehow singlehandedly discredit what may when all is said and done come to be seen as the most significant grass-roots movement in America in a long, long time. Earlier today, Clay Waters at NewsBusters reviewed Zernike’s new book, “Boiling Mad — Inside Tea Party America,” noted that she “evinces little sympathy or feel for conservative concerns,” and is intent on “finding racism everywhere she looks in Tea Party land.” In a late March post (at NewsBusters ; BizzyBlog ), I noted a Zernike item (“With No Jobs, Plenty of Time for Tea Party”) which cynically questioned “whether the movement can survive an improvement in the economy, with people trading protest signs for paychecks.” This is the same Kate Zernike  Andrew Breitbart memorably called “a despicable human being” after she claimed to have found racism that really didn’t exist at CPAC in February. With that background, the paragraphs that follow from Kate’s latest calamity won’t surprise anyone too much, but they will as usual disappoint if you’re foolishly expecting anything resembling fair treatment (bold as mine): So you’re a Republican candidate and you want to take advantage of the Tea Party energy that jolted once-sleepy primaries. But you aren’t sure whether that means you have to take a stand against masturbation or urge your supporters to gather their bayonets — tactics that seem to have worked for a few Tea Party candidates so far. You’re not certain most Americans share the Tea Party enthusiasm for repealing the 17th Amendment (or even know that it established direct election of United States senators by popular vote). You don’t have Sarah Palin’s phone number. Not to worry. There’s no doubt that the Tea Party is a double-edged sword: a New York Times/CBS poll last week found that while most Americans had not formed a view of the Tea Party, the percentage of independent voters who view it negatively had increased. But the Tea Party has brought a swell of new participants to the political process, and historical and economic trends are working in favor of the party out of power — that would be you, G.O.P. The trick is to take advantage of the Tea Party passion and stay away from its extremes. Celebrate the genius of the Constitution, but don’t get into the particulars. Tea Party activists, Republican moderates and independent handicappers all agree that the road for Republican candidates is to talk about the debt and concerns about the new health care legislation — areas where Tea Party sentiment is more aligned with the views of most Americans. … Tea Party activists — and their candidates — pose a problem when they move the discussion into a broader one about the role of government. “You see these rallies and the signs are all about the Constitution,” said Stuart Rothenberg, editor of a nonpartisan political report. “They want it to be about these big ideological ideas, when I don’t think most voters think that way. It’s very clear that what’s best for the election is to make it about Obama, Pelosi, health care, the deficit.” Rothenberg is about as “nonpartisan” as Larry Sabato , i.e., give me a break. He also doesn’t get it if he really thinks that enough voters to matter aren’t worried about the Constitution and how its limits on Executive Branch perogatives are being ignored. You’ll note that Zernike didn’t quote a bona fide Tea Party member about her novel suggestion to “not get into the particulars” of the Constitution. Zernike? The arrogant condescension continues. Remember in November. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Read the original post:
At NYT, Kate Zernike’s Clueless Advice to GOP Candidates: ‘Enlist (Tea Partiers), but Avoid Speeches on the Constitution’

D.C. ABC Reporter Doug McKelway Fired for Argument Over Anti-Obama, Anti-Greenpeace Bias

The Washington Post reported Friday that WJLA-TV, the local D.C. area affiliate of ABC, has fired longtime anchorman Doug McKelway for “insubordination and misconduct” after (or during?) an April report on left-wing oil spill protesters (video here ): In his piece, McKelway said the sparsely attended event attracted protesters “largely representing far-left environmental groups.” [He cited Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.] He went on to say the protest “may be a risky strategy because the one man who has more campaign contributions from BP than anybody else in history is now sitting in the Oval Office, President Barack Obama, who accepted $77,051 in campaign contributions from BP.” After a brief taped segment updating efforts to cap the BP well, McKelway added that the Senate was unlikely to pass “cap-and-trade” legislation this year, because “the Democrats are looking at the potential for huge losses in Congress come the midterm elections. And the last thing they want to do is propose a huge escalation in your electric bill, your utility bill, before then.” [Station manager and news director Bill] Lord took exception to McKelway’s reporting and asked to meet with him, according to several station sources who were granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive personnel matter. A shouting match between the two men ensued, leading to McKelway’s suspension, sources said. McKelway has alleged liberal favoritism in news reporting before; when he left his anchor chair at WRC after nine years to join WJLA in mid-2001, he blasted the station’s lack of “balance,” in a newspaper article. WJLA is owned by Allbritton Communications, which is also the owner of the liberal Politico website (and newspaper). Aside from whatever words McKelway and Lord had, it’s quite clear that McKelway was summoned for a scolding over conservative bias. Allbritton apparently expects all of its reporters to toe an Obama-friendly, Greenpeace-friendly line. Earlier: Liberal bosses may have also hated McKelway’s forceful disapproval of a gay-left “outing” advocate

View original post here:
D.C. ABC Reporter Doug McKelway Fired for Argument Over Anti-Obama, Anti-Greenpeace Bias

Which GOP Senate Candidate Gets the Worst Media Treatment?

Read the rest here:
Which GOP Senate Candidate Gets the Worst Media Treatment?

WaPo Buries Story with Obvious Palin Point: Tuesday Results Show Emerging Year of the GOP Woman

While most media outlets obsessed over the liberal theme that Republicans keep “suicidally” nominating “ultra-conservatives,” Washington Post reporter Anne Kornblut, who authored a book earlier this year called Notes from the Cracked Ceiling, noticed a different trend. Her story was headlined “GOP gains the lead in female politicians’ steps forward.” Tuesday’s victories of Palin-endorsed GOP women Christine O’Donnell and Kelly Ayotte underline an emerging Year of the Republican Woman. Too bad the Post buried it on Page A-6 of the paper, and it hasn’t been linked on the Post’s homepage today, either. Kornblut began: Democrats used to own the field of women running for higher office. Not anymore. Nearly two years after an anticipated gender bounce – with predictions that women in both parties would rush into politics inspired by Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sarah Palin — it turns out that the momentum is on the Republican side. If there is a Palin effect, it is not being matched by any Clinton effect at the other end of the ideological spectrum. Since this is the liberal Washington Post, Kornblut then turned to a cast of liberals and Democrats to assess whether this can be verified:  Democratic pollster Celinda Lake said it is “very fair” to argue that the energy for female candidates is trending Republican, a view several other Democratic strategists shared. “I’ve been struck by it,” said Dee Dee Myers, a former White House press secretary and author of “Why Women Should Rule the World.” “All the momentum is on the tea party side, so why wouldn’t it also be with the women on the tea party side?” Other Democrats dispute the notion of a conservative “year of the woman,” saying that the numerical advantage is slight, if it exists at all. They also note that some of the Republican nominees, including Christine O’Donnell of Delaware, are seen as fringe candidates unlikely to win their general elections. Stephanie Schriock, the head of Emily’s List, which is dedicated to electing [ahem, Democrat] pro-choice women, said the “candidates that are making it through these primaries are more and more extreme, radical right-wing folks” who, even though they are female, do not appeal to independent and moderate women. A Republican expert wasn’t quoted until the story’s final paragraph, although Kornblut credited Palin: Palin has unquestionably played an outsize role in upping the Republican numbers, endorsing several women, including Haley and O’Donnell, who might never have gained sufficient attention otherwise. She has brought to the Republican Party what some members had once complained did not exist: a concerted effort to tap female candidates for promotion and lift them out of obscurity. And then there is this: The woman most capable of counteracting a Palin bounce for Democrats – Secretary of State Clinton- is not available to campaign. Add to that a general sense of malaise among Democrats, a volatile electorate angry at the status quo and a growing acceptance of female politicians in both parties, and the trend is hardly a surprise, strategists said. “Who better to say, ‘I’m not part of the establishment’ than a Republican woman?” said Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway. “If you want to convey you are not of the firmament of Washington, D.C., and ergo of all the problems and out-of-control spending and corruption, you have to say, ‘I’m a Republican woman,’ because so few of them have ever been involved at that level.” You can see why the rest of the Post would want to bury this story. But the rest of the media ought to acknowledge it. They can’t say it’s not The Year of the Republican Woman because they’ll probably lose: several primary winners (the “Year of the Woman” when liberals ascended with an “Anita Hill effect”) lost in November. 

Read more:
WaPo Buries Story with Obvious Palin Point: Tuesday Results Show Emerging Year of the GOP Woman

Networks Ignore Fired Koran Burner, Defended Teacher Who Compared Bush, Hitler

Derek Fenton, the man who burned pages of the Koran while protesting the planned Ground Zero Mosque in New York City,  lost his job  at NJTransit because of his demonstration. The network news outlets couldn’t care less. None of the networks – ABC, CBS, NBC – have mentioned Fenton’s name, according to a review of show transcripts. Maybe they spent all their free speech-debate interest back in 2006 when they hurried to defend a Colorado teacher who was suspending after he compared President Bush to Adolf Hitler. Jay Bennish made headlines in March 2006 after one of his students released a tape of Bennish comparing Bush to Hitler and declaring that America was the world’s most violent nation. Bennish was suspended – placed on paid leave – while officials reviewed his conduct. (He was eventually reinstated.) All three networks defended him by characterizing his comments as free speech. On ABC “Good Morning America” March 3, Bill Weir characterized the controversy as a “battle over free speech.” Reporter Dan Harris said the incident “provoked a national debate about academic freedom.” The CBS “Early Show” on March 3 highlighted students protesting Bennish’s suspension, during which they chanted, “Freedom of speech, let him teach.” Co-host Harry Smith also downplayed Bennish’s comments, suggesting he “was suspended for saying that some people compared President Bush to Adolf Hitler,” even though Bennish himself had made the comparison. On NBC’s “Today” show March 7, co-host Matt Lauer interviewed Bennish and portrayed him as the victim of a conservative smear job. “They basically shopped it around to conservative media outlets, and when they finally released it to one, it created an uproar,” Lauer said of the student who released the tape. “And on the tape you can hear [student] Sean Allen asking you questions that seem to be egging you on a little bit. Do you feel you were set up?” Even President Bush jumped into the fray, saying that “freedom for people to express themselves must be protected.”  The near-universal defense of Bennish’s comment was that he was trying to provoke debate among his students. “His whole goal is to fire these kids up,” his attorney David Lane, said at the time, “and you have to take some extreme positions to fire these kids up. Let them debate it.” Yet today, none of the networks have been eager to characterize Fenton’s protest as “free speech” or to suggest, as some politicians and civil liberties advocates have, that Fenton was wrongly fired. “So long as his actions, however misguided, took place on his own time, and he was not acting in his capacity as a representative of NJTransit but as an American exercising his constitutional rights, then the agency is clearly in the wrong,” New Jersey State Sen.  Raymond Lesniak  said.  Like this article? Sign up for “Culture Links,” CMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter, by   clicking   here.

With Tax Hikes Coming, Cable News Uses ‘Tax Cut’ Phrasing 13 Times as Much

The largest tax hikes in history get closer every day, and the focus of the news cycle is finally on taxes . Tax cuts , that is. After portraying Obama as a tax cutter when he took office, journalists have recently been talking about the Bush tax cuts, whose expiration will amount to a huge tax increase on Americans. But most stories have failed to explain that the pending expiration will raise taxes on many people, including investors, small business owners and families, during an economic slowdown. While cable primetime shows criticized conservatives for wanting to “cut taxes” for the wealthy, a morning appearance by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was one of the few that put the debate in perspective of tax hikes. McConnell appeared on MSNBC’s “Daily Rundown” Sept. 14 and said, “This [Bush tax cuts] has been tax policy for 10 years now. This is not about tax cuts, this is about raising taxes in the middle of a recession.” According to Americans for Tax Reform, many tax increases are on the way. On Jan. 1, 2011, personal income taxes will rise, the “marriage penalty” will return, the child tax credit will be chopped in half, the “death tax” will return and capital gains and dividend tax rates will jump. But that is the opposite of the way the mainstream media have been telling the story. Primetime cable shows on MSNBC, CNN and Fox News Channel have focused on the fight over “tax cuts” more than 13 times as often as they discussed it in terms of tax hikes. On weekday evenings between Sept. 6 and Sept. 13, 27 of those primetime cable shows framed the debate around tax cuts, compared to just two that spoke solely in terms of tax increases. An additional 12 shows presented both tax cut and tax increase phrasing. FNC was the most balanced with nine of its primetime programs using both terms to cover the story. But MSNBC coverage was full of liberal talking points and spin. Keith Olbermann distorted the facts entirely on “Countdown” Sept. 13, claiming that “the gripping detail is this: Democrats want to cut everyone’s taxes, Republicans want to cut taxes on every dollar earned above a quarter-million.” That misrepresented the position of Republicans including McConnell, who told MSNBC the next day that “We should not be raising taxes on anyone during a recession.” McConnell said he is unwilling to raise taxes on anyone, even the wealthy. Obama’s so-called compromise solution has met resistance even from some Democrats , who agree with Republicans that that raising taxes on anyone in a bad economy is a bad idea. Former White House budget director Peter Orszag wrote a column calling for his own kind of compromise: extend the cuts for two years, then scrap them all. But the president insists he does not want to extend the tax cuts for top income earners. Obama campaigned on repealing the Bush Tax cuts for the “rich” setting the bar for wealth at $250,000 for families, $200,000 for individuals. The White House has mentioned extending those tax cuts for people making less, but also wants to spend more money on ” clean energy ” and infrastructure.   According to Jeffrey Miron of Cato Institute, the Bush tax cuts that are set to expire worked because they made the market more efficient . Writing specifically of dividend and capital gains taxes, Miron noted, “These taxes appear to hit wealthy capitalists, but in reality they fall partly on consumers via higher prices, and on workers, via lower demands for their services when corporations shut down or move overseas. So low taxation of dividends and capital gains helps both low and high income taxpayers.” White House Given Face Time on Broadcast Morning Shows, Boehner Gets None MSNBC and CNN weren’t the only ones spinning the tax cut/hike debate from the left. Rep. John Boehner created a political controversy after he said on “Face the Nation,” “If the only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I’ll vote for it.” Boehner had said he would “fight” against raising taxes on anyone, but his apparent compromise was fodder for journalists (and cheap shots from MSNBC about his “trademark tan”). All three broadcast network morning shows highlighted Boehner’s remarks Sept. 13 as they discussed Obama’s “compromise” bill, and they all made sure to give the Obama administration time to plead their case, while failing to interview Boehner. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was interviewed live on “The Early Show,” “Today” and “Good Morning America” following segments about the political fight over taxes. The shows aired a snippet of Boehner’s “Face the Nation” interview, but didn’t bring him on to elaborate or defend himself against left-wing attacks. In contrast, Gibbs was given 10 minutes and 55 seconds that morning to present Obama’s views and attack Boehner. Gibbs told CBS the U.S. shouldn’t “borrow” $700 billion to extend tax cuts “for folks quite frankly, that weren’t asking for them and don’t particularly need them.” On Sept. 8, Obama had accused Republicans and Boehner specifically of holding tax cuts “hostage .” In the same speech he called for Republicans to stop blocking the Senate’s small business bill, which he supports. One reason for conservative opposition of the small business bill is disagreement over a $30 billion Treasury-run ” lending facility ” for small businesses. The Hill reported on Aug. 31, that Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council President Karen Kerrigan has said the bill will not address the problems such businesses are facing . “The concerns and needs of most business owners go much deeper, and this legislation does not address broader issues related to taxes, regulations and excessive spending which threaten to aggravate currently poor economic conditions,” Kerrigan said. “At the end of the day, proposed tax hikes along with legislation and regulatory initiatives in the pipeline will drive business costs higher and drain more private capital from our economy.” Kerrigan specifically cited the expiring Bush-era tax cuts which will increase taxes on small businesses as one of the reasons for “stalled” small business expansion. Cannot ‘Afford’ Top 2-3 Percent Cuts? Obama’s primary argument has been that the U.S. cannot “afford” to extend the tax cuts to the rich. Many in the news media have echoed that claim, and perpetuated the liberal argument that tax cuts are a “cost.” That argument is one of five common ways the media spin tax stories in a liberal direction. Calling tax cuts a “cost” assumes that all money belongs to the government, rather than to the taxpayers who have worked hard for it. Olbermann pushed that liberal theme Sept. 13 when he blasted Boehner saying: “[He] wants to increase that deficit by $700 billion over ten years by extending those Bush tax cuts on income over a quarter-million.” MSNBC’s Savannah Guthrie also promoted that viewpoint in her interview with McConnell Sept. 13. Guthrie pressed McConnell to admit that tax cuts would increase the deficit. “You don’t dispute that it would require more debt for these tax cuts? You don’t dispute that?” Guthrie asked the senator. CNN’s Ali Velshi claimed tax cuts aren’t “free” and that extending the Bush tax cuts to the top 3 percent of earners would cost ” between 650 and 700 billion dollars. Extending it for the rest of us is going to cost a lot more, possibly $3 trillion.” The media have long attacked the tax cuts claiming that they were responsible for the deficit, instead of criticizing government spending. Conservatives argue that government spending is the real problem in Washington. According to Stephen Moore’s book “The End of Prosperity,” the 2003 tax cuts generated a huge increase in federal tax receipts. A $785 billion increase between 2004 and 2007, Ryan Dwyer told The Washington Times. That was after Bush had slashed dividend and capital gains rates to 15 percent in 2003. The economy also bounced back, according to Dwyer: “In three years, $15 trillion of new wealth was created. The U.S. economy added 8 million new jobs from mid-2003 to early 2007, and the median household increased its wealth by $20,000 in real terms.” Similarly, under President Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts federal revenues grew rapidly ( 33 percent cumulative growth ) according to a Congressional Economic Update from 1995. Instead of arguing that the U.S. can’t afford to cut taxes, Cato Institute Director of Tax Policy Chris Edwards argued that the U.S. can’t afford not to. He wrote that the average top tax rate for the top 30 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) nations has fallen by 5 percentage points since 2000. So if the top rate tax cuts are not extended the U.S. will have the tenth highest rate among the 30 countries jeopardizing the nation’s competitiveness. Like this article? Then sign up for our newsletter, The Balance Sheet .

Read the original here:
With Tax Hikes Coming, Cable News Uses ‘Tax Cut’ Phrasing 13 Times as Much

Kudlow Calls Tea Parties Bullish for Economy: ‘Don’t Believe the Mainstream Media’

The Media Research Center isn’t the only ones out there telling folks to be wary of the media and its coverage of the Tea Party movement.  On his Sept. 15 broadcast , Larry Kudlow, host of CNBC’s “The Kudlow Report,” hit that point. Referring to “Tea Party” primary win in Delaware, New York and New Hampshire, Kudlow explained that this shift to the right was a net-positive for the economy. “Tonight, free-market capitalism on the comeback trail,” Kudlow said. “That is one of the messages of the Tea Party power. We saw a lot of that power last night in the primaries. I tell you what folks, that Tea Party power, that free-market capitalist power is so totally bullish for the stock market.” Kudlow advised his viewers to be skeptical of the media, which has covered the Tea Party movement and their candidates very critically, even sometimes disparagingly. He cited the “Contract FROM America,” a document put forth by various conservative organizations calling on elected leaders and political candidates to stand on a number of conservative principles. ” Don’t believe the mainstream media ,” he continued. “Don’t believe the pundits in either the Republican Party or the Democratic Party. They don’t understand Tea Parties. I do. We’ve had them on this show time and time again as guests, including, including their referendum, the ‘Contract FROM America.'”  The CNBC host has his own 12-step program for the economy.  He maintains that, if successful, the limitations the Tea Party philosophy would put on government are the best way to get back to an economy rooted in free-market principles. “They are talking free markets – lower spending, lower taxing, lower regulations, even constitutional limits to government, and you heard me talk about this last week in my free market 12-step plan for prosperity,” Kudlow said. “The rise of the Tea Party people – they are going to win the vast majority of those Senate races and we are going it see a sea change in American policies back to freedom and entrepreneurship, and that is bullish.”

Go here to see the original:
Kudlow Calls Tea Parties Bullish for Economy: ‘Don’t Believe the Mainstream Media’

Open Thread: Obama, the Musical

As Jonah Goldberg puts it, ” Oh, Dear Lord “. Hey, at least the dancing is impressive. Thoughts? 

Read the original:
Open Thread: Obama, the Musical

Brent Bozell Makes Major Announcement at 7 p.m. EDT

Brent Bozell, the founder and president of the Media Research Center, and publisher of NewsBusters, will be making an important announcement at 7 p.m. (Eastern Time) on Wednesday, September 15.   This announcement will be made via live web broadcast and you won’t want to miss it!   The liberal media are in panic mode. The Obama experiment in socialism is failing. Americans are waking up and rising up for freedom and limited government. America is truly at a crossroads of history. The next few months may very well determine whether socialism or freedom will be the dominant force in American government for decades to come.   The Media Research Center will not watch this struggle unfold from the sidelines and we know that you don’t plan to either.   So be sure to view the webcast here or by watching the video chat embed below the page break.

Follow this link:
Brent Bozell Makes Major Announcement at 7 p.m. EDT