Claim Review: CNN Journalist Admits Network Lied During Election Campaign

The claim that CNN political commentator Scott Jennings admitted the network misled the American public 'night after night' during their election coverage and focused on 'gimmicks' to elect Kamala Harris has been circulating widely. This claim originates from an article published by The People's Voice on November 6, 2024.

According to the article, Jennings stated during a segment following Trump's electoral victory that 'the story that we portrayed was not true.' He also mentioned several 'gimmicks' that CNN used to try to sway the election in favor of Kamala Harris, such as focusing on Puerto Rico, Liz Cheney, and Nikki Haley voters. Jennings further emphasized that CNN ignored the fundamentals of the election, such as inflation and economic struggles faced by many Americans.

To evaluate this claim, it is important to consider the context and the source of the information. The People's Voice is not a widely recognized or reputable news source, and its articles often lack the rigorous fact-checking and editorial standards of mainstream media outlets. Additionally, the article does not provide a direct quote or video evidence of Jennings making these statements, which raises questions about the accuracy of the claim.

Furthermore, it is worth noting that Jennings is a political commentator, not a journalist, and his opinions and analyses may not reflect the official stance of CNN. Political commentators are often hired to provide diverse viewpoints and may express personal opinions that do not align with the network's editorial policies.

In the absence of verifiable evidence, such as a direct quote or video footage, it is difficult to confirm the accuracy of the claim. While Jennings may have expressed dissatisfaction with CNN's election coverage, the extent to which he admitted to deliberate misinformation or 'gimmicks' is unclear.

In conclusion, the claim that CNN political commentator Scott Jennings admitted the network misled the public during the election campaign is partially true but lacks sufficient context and supporting evidence. The claim should be approached with caution, and further verification is needed to determine its accuracy.