>> Rooney: I'M EMILY ROONEY, WELCOME TO "BEAT THE PRESS."

OUR TOPICS: CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM WERE AN ISSUE AT THE BEGINNING OF DEREK CHAUVIN'S TRIAL; NOW, IT'S VIDEO CAUGHT ON CAMERA THAT'S MAKING THE CASE.

PBS COMES UNDER FIRE FOR A LACK OF DIVERSITY AND ITS EXCLUSIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH FILMMAKER KEN BURNS.

AND THE "WASHINGTON POST" REVERSES A POLICY ON COVERING SEXUAL ASSAULT IF YOU'VE BEEN A VICTIM YOURSELF.

PLUS, OUR PANEL'S "RANTS AND RAVES" OF THE WEEK.

JOINING ME ARE: MEDIA STRATEGIST SUSIE BANIKARIM; DAN KENNEDY OF NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY; THE "BOSTON GLOBE'S" LYLAH ALPHONSE AND CALLIE CROSSLEY OF GBH NEWS.

FIRST UP, IT'S BEEN MORE THAN 25 YEARS SINCE THE TRIAL OF ONE-TIME FOOTBALL STAR O.J.

SIMPSON GRABBED CENTER STAGE AS A TELEVISED EVENT.

NOW, THE TRIAL IN MINNEAPOLIS OF FORMER POLICE OFFICER DEREK CHAUVIN IS GETTING SIMILAR ATTENTION.

AND WHILE CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM ARE A PART OF THIS, IT'S VIDEO EVIDENCE THAT IS MAKING THE CASE.

AFTER WEEKS OF JURY SELECTION, THE TRIAL OF FORMER OFFICER DEREK CHAUVIN BEGAN AND TESTIMONY HAS BEEN GRIPPING.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE EVER-- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE EVER SEEN ANYONE BE KILLED, BUT IT'S UPSETTING.

>> Rooney: THAT'S FIREFIGHTER GENEVIEVE HANSEN, WHO SAID SHE WANTED TO HELP GEORGE FLOYD.

AND HERE IS THE VOICE OF TEENAGER DANIELLE FRAZIER WHO TOOK THE INFAMOUS PHONE VIDEO OF CHAUVIN KNEELING ON FLOYD'S NECK.

>> I HEARD GEORGE FLOYD SAYING, "I CAN'T BREATHE, PLEASE GET OFF OF ME. "

>> Rooney: WHILE BOTH SIDES AGREED TO THE PRESENCE OF CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM, ALL THE USUAL TREPIDATIONS HAVE SURFACED, FROM WITNESS INTIMIDATION, TO LAWYERLY THEATRICS, TO FAIRNESS TO THE DEFENDANT.

>> CRITICS OF CAMERAS IN COURTS MIGHT ARGUE THAT IN VARIOUS WAYS THE PRESENCE OF CAMERAS COULD CHANGE THE NATURE OF WITNESS TESTIMONY.

BUT IF YOU WATCH THE EARLY PORTION OF THIS TRIAL, THE PRESENCE OF CAMERAS REALLY DIDN'T SEEM TO CHANGE THE WAY ANYONE WAS INTERACTING IN THE COURTROOM.

>> Rooney: THAT'S JON ALLSOP, WHO WRITES A MEDIA COLUMN FOR "COLUMBIA JOURNALISM REVIEW."

HE SAYS WHAT REALLY MATTERS IS HOW JOURNALISTS COMPORT THEMSELVES IN COVERING A TRIAL.

>> ALL THE KIND OF FANFARE AND PUNDITRY AND SORT OF INFOTAINMENT TRIMMINGS, ABOUT WHETHER CAMERAS SHOULD BE PRESENT OR NOT.

>> Rooney: BUT IT'S NOT CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM THAT ARE MOST LIKELY TO AFFECT THIS TRIAL; IT'S THE VIDEO EVIDENCE FROM POLICE BODY CAMS, BYSTANDERS, AND SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS.

ALREADY AT LEAST FIVE VIDEOS HAVE BEEN SHOWN, FROM THE INFAMOUS NINE MINUTES AND 29 SECONDS, TO OUTSIDE AND INSIDE FOOD CUP.

AS JOE ALLSOP SAYS, IT'S TIME TO EMBRACE CAMERAS.

>> ITS UP TO EVERYONE IN SOCIETY TO APPLY SORT OF COLLECTIVE SCRUTINY, IN SO MANY WAYS.

THE PRESENCE OF CAMERAS CAN ACTUALLY BE AN AID TO THAT.

>> Rooney: AND SO FAR, THAT'S TRUE.

SUSIE IT SEEMS ALMOST ACQUAINT THAT WE'RE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT CAMERAS 92 COURTROOMS.

THIS IS THE FIRST FULL BLOWN TELEVISED TRIAL THE STATE HAS EVER HAD SO IT'S VERY UNUSUAL.

THEY WENT THROUGH ALL THESE MACHINATIONS THAT WE WENT THROUGH, 30, 40 YEARS AGO.

>> I UNDERSTAND THE MIXED FEELINGS.

I THINK, WE HAVE SEEN HOW CAMERAS HAVE CREATED A CIRCUS LIKE ENVIRONMENT LIKE WITH O.J.

SIMPSONSON.

O.J.

SIMPSON ON THE OTHER HAND WITH COVID AND THE LEVEL OF INTEREST IN THIS TRIAL, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS.

>> ABSOLUTELY EXPECT I THINK WE GET CAUGHT UP TOO MUCH ON WHETHER CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM ARE GOOD OR BAD.

I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS A MATTER OF COURSE JUST BECAUSE THE FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES THE MARTIN LUTHER PUBLIC AND THE MEDIA TO ACCESS TO TRIALS.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT BUSINESS BEING DONE IN THE NAME OF THE PUBLIC.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE COURTS HAVE NEVER HELD THAT CAMERAS -- THAT WE DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM BUT I REALLY THINK WE SHOULD.

AND IN THIS CASE I THINK THE VIDEO IS SO COMPELLING, BOTH INSIDE THE COURTROOM AND ALSO THE VIDEO ETCHED, THAT I'M HOPING THIS ADDS -- EVIDENCE, THAT I'M HOPING THIS ADDS TO THE ARGUMENT THAT CAMERAS OUGHT TO BE ALLOWED IN, AS A MATTER OF COURSE.

>> Rooney: AND FEDERAL COURTROOMS TOO DAN RIGHT?

>> OF COURSE.

>> IT'S PASTIME TO ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN.

I'D BE CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT THE EXPERTS SAID HOW THIS HAPPENED.

BUT BE AT A TIME WHEN HE WE ARE VIDEO SATURATED, DOES THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE, IN A TRIAL OF THIS SORT THAT IS SO FAR QUITE EMOTIONALLY IN THE TESTIMONY, AND EVEN IN THE VIDEO IT IS EMOTIONALLY WITH NO COMMENTARY FROM ANYBODY.

WAY BEYOND WHETHER THE CAMERAS SHOULD BE THERE, I THINK I'LL BE INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT STUDIES AND REACTION IS TO HOW THE CAMERAS WERE RECEIVED, IN A TRIAL LIKE THIS AT THIS TIME.

>> SO I THINK CAMERAS SHOULD BE IN THE COURTROOMS AS A MATTER OF DOCUMENTING EVERYTHING.

I DON'T THINK THAT THAT MEANS THAT EVERYTHING THE CAMERA CAPTURES NEEDS TO BE BROADCASTED.

I DON'T THINK IN A CASE LIKE THIS WHERE THE VIRD YOAZ EVIDENCE IS SO CLEAR ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED THAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE WATCHING FOR CURIOSITY OR ENTERTAINMENT, CHARACTER ASSASSINATION, FALSE EQUIVALENCECY, WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO DEFEND INDID DEFENSIBLE.

I THINK WHETHER CAMERAS SHOULD BE ALLOWED OR THE PRESS SHOULD BE ALLOWED, WHEN I SAY THAT, I DON'T THINK EVERYTHING SHOULD BE BROADCAST, I DON'T THINK EVERYTHING SHOULD BE REPORTED ON.

ESPECIALLY IN CASE HE LIKE THIS WHERE EMOTIONS ARE RUB RUNNING VERY HIGH COUPLE I'M NOT SURE THERE'S A REASON TO WATCH LITTLE KIDS HAVING TO EXPLAIN WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO WATCH SOMEONE DIE I MEAN, THAT'S NOT -- I DON'T SEE HOW THAT BENEFITS THE PUBLIC.

>> Rooney: REALLY, REALLY?

SHE WAS POOH WITNESS.

>> SHE WAS A WITNESS.

MAYBE I'M SPEAKING AS A PARENT.

I WOULDN'T WANT TO PUT MY KID THROUGH THAT AND -- >> Rooney: SHE WASN'T IN THE CAMERA, SHE WAS OFF CAMERA.

>> MY POINT IS A LOT OF PEOPLE SOMETIMES WATCH THESE THINGS OUT OF CURIOSITY AND MAYBE FOR ENTERTAINMENT.

AND I WONDER WHERE THE LINE GETS DRAWN.

HMM, ANYBODY WANT TO TAKE THAT ON?

>> I THINK SUCH A THING AS TRANSPARENCY HERE ESPECIALLY FOR A LEGAL SYSTEM WHERE WE HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES, I'M GOING TO SORT OF VOTE FOR THE SIDE OF TRANSPARENCY.

I SEE YOUR POINT.

BIT CHILDREN AS A POINT THAT CHILDREN AND FAMILY MEMBERS WERE ALLOWED TO ASK NOT TO BE SHOWN.

>> Rooney: I THINK THAT WAS A GOOD RULE.

ALL RIGHT.

WELL, PBS IS UNDER FIRE THIS WEEK FOR WHAT A GROUP OF DIVERSE FILMMAKERS CLAIM IS AN OVER-RELIANCE ON DOCUMENTARY PRODUCER KEN BURNS AT THE EXPENSE OF PEOPLE OF COLOR.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PBS CHIEF PAULA KERGER, SIGNED BY 130 OR SO FILM MAKERS ACCUSES THE NETWORK OF SUPPORTING "UNINVESTIGATED PRIVILEGE," MEANING KEN BURNS PRETTY MUCH DOES WHAT HE WANTS AND PBS AIRS IT.

>>> OVER FOUR DECADES, DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER KEN BURNS HAS PRODUCED ABOUT 200 HOURS OF FILM, AND PBS HAS BEEN HIS PLATFORM.

>> JACKIE ROBINSON IS THE ORIGINAL CIVIL RIGHTS PIONEER.

>> Rooney: BURNS' TOPICS RANGE FROM BASEBALL, TO THE CIVIL WAR, TO HIS LATEST, SIX HOURS ON ERNEST HEMINGWAY.

>> WE'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT HEMINGWAY FOR LITERALLY DECADES.

>> Rooney: BUT NOW, A GROUP CALLING ITSELF "BIPOC MAKERS" OR "BEYOND INCLUSION" HAS SENT A LETTER TO PBS CHIEF PAULA KERGER CRITICIZING THE NETWORK FOR A LACK OF DIVERSITY, POINTING DIRECTLY TO ITS EXCLUSIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH KEN BURNS.

>> I WORKED ON THIS LANDMARK GROUNDBREAKING SERIES ABOUT ASIAN AMERICANS.

>> Rooney: THAT'S FILMMAKER GRACE LEE, ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO SIGNED THE LETTER.

LAST FALL, LEE WROTE AN ESSAY MAKING SIMILAR COMPLAINTS ABOUT BURNS AND PBS WHICH HELPED GET THE "BEYOND INCLUSION" MOVEMENT GOING.

>> WE GOT FIVE HOURS TO TELL 150 YEARS OF MAIRNG HISTORY.

ERNEST HEMINGWAY, ONE MAN GETS SIX HOURS OF DOCUMENTARY TIME.

SO, THIS KIND OF DISPARITY IS SOMETHING THAT I WANTED TO CALL ATTENTION TO.

>> Rooney: PAULA KERGER DEFENDED BOTH BURNS AND PBS, SAYING "FINDING YOUR ROOTS" PRODUCER HENRY LEWIS GATES HAS GOTTEN EVEN MORE AIRTIME THAN BURNS.

BUT LEE REJECTS THE GATES COMPARISON AND SAYS PBS HAS FAILED TO AIR A DIVERSITY OF VOICES.

>> THERE'S NO D.N.A.

MATCH WHATSOEVER TO ANY OF THOSE BOYS.

>> Rooney: THE FACT THAT A BURNS DOCUMENTARY HELPED CLEAR THE NAMES OF THE CENTRAL PARK FIVE AND GIVES VOICE TO CULTURAL AND RACIAL EQUITY IN ALL HIS FILMS IS APPARENTLY BESIDE THE POINT.

>> THIS GROUP SAYS IT WASN'T ABOUT KEN BURNS BUT IN THIS ESSAY IT'S ALL ABOUT KEN BURNS.

THERE IS NO DOUBT, WHO KNEW THAT PEOPLE WANTED TO WATCH THINGS THAT WENT SIX AND SEVEN HOURS AND THERE IS NO ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HIS HISTORICAL PLACE IN ALL OF THIS.

THEY DIDN'T SAY WHICH FILMS, WHICH FILM MAKERS DIDN'T HAVE A VOICE BECAUSE KEN HAD SO MUCH.

IF YOU DO THE MATH, HE SAID 200 HOURS BUT THAT AVERAGES OUT TO FIVE HOURS A YEAR OVER 40 YEARS.

>> I THINK KEN BURNS DOES SOME INCREDIBLE WORK AND IT'S ALWAYS TRICKY WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT GIVING MORE OPPORTUNITY TO A DIVERSITY OF PEOPLE, VERSUS AIRING CONTENT THAT SHOWS A DIVERSITY OF VIEWS OR DIVERSITY OF TOPICS.

AND I THINK THE LINE GETS BLURRED HERE.

I ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THE COMPLAINT THAT PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE NOT GETTING ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY IN THE SAME WAY BURNS WHO HAS ALREADY HAD PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY SEEMS TO GET EVEN MORE.

BUT IN THIS CASE, I THINK YOU REALLY NEED TO CONSIDER WHAT IT IS THAT IS BEING SHOWN.

PERSONALLY, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T WATCH SIX HOURS OF ERNEST HEMINGWAY BUT I DO WATCH A LOT OF OTHER PBS SHOWS THAT SHOW A LOT OF OTHER THINGS.

THERE'S ALSO A BUSINESS ASPECT HERE.

KEN BURNS BRINGS IN MONEY.

PEOPLE WANT TO SEE HIM.

HE'S FAMILIAR.

HE'S LIKE THE BIG-NAME ACTOR IN THE BOX OFFICE FILM IN A LOT OF WAYS.

AND I THINK THAT ANY STATION WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO DROP A BIG DRAW, JUST IN ORDER TO OFFER OPPORTUNITY TO A LOT OF PEOPLE.

AND I THINK THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE.

BUT THE RISK HAS TO BE TAKEN AT SOME POINT, I'M JUST NOT SURE WHEN THAT WILL HAPPEN.

>> WELL, I DON'T WANT TO CRITICIZE KEN BURNS EITHER BECAUSE I THINK HE'S TERRIFIC.

BUT WHAT I WOULD POINT OUT IS THAT EVENLY THOUGH HE ONLY AVERAGES OUT TO FIVE HOURS A YEAR, THERE'S ONLY A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT PBS IS GIVING TO THAT TYPE OF DOCUMENTARY.

SO IN ORDER FOR WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOR, AND OTHER FILM MAKERS, TO GET INTO THAT LINEUP, IN ADDITION TO KEN BURNS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO -- PBS WOULD HAVE TO FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE WHAT THEY DO.

AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THEY WANT TO DO THAT.

YOU KNOW, PBS HAS TWO DIFFERENT MISSIONS, AND ONE OF THEM IS TO APPEAL TO VIEWERS, AND PULL IN MONEY, WHICH LYLAH ALLUDED TO.

BUT THE OTHER IS THAT YOU KNOW THIS ISN'T ONE OF THE COMMERCIAL NETWORKS.

THEY'RE ALSO SUPPOSED TO BE PROVIDING ACCESS TO DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES.

AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THESE CASES WHERE WE'RE SEEING A CLASH BETWEEN THOSE TWO DIFFERENT MISSIONS.

AND FRANKLY, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME WAY TO RESOLVE THAT, SO THAT THERE IS A MORE DIVERSE LINEUP OF DOCUMENTARIES.

I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A SUGGESTION AS TO HOW THAT BE DONE BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IT BE DONE.

>> Rooney: THE CONTENT IS DIVERSE BUT THE PEOPLE WHO PRODUCE IT IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

>> PBS DOES NOT HAVE A TON OF MONEY.

THEIR BUDGETS FOR DOCUMENTARIES IS NOT SUPER-HIGH AND MY GUESS IS KEN BURNS GETS A VERY LARGE DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF THEIR BUDGET.

SO THERE IS SORT OF DECISIONS THAT GET MADE HERE THAT DO IMPACT OTHER FILM MAKERS AND WHAT THEY CAN DO AND WHAT THEY CAN SELL TO PBS.

AND LOOK, I THINK THESE GUYS MADE A POINT.

GRACE MADE A POINT IN HER ORIGINAL LETTER, THE YEAR SHE GOT FIVE YEARS TO DO ASIAN AMERICANS, THEY GAVE TO KEN BURNS TO DO OTHER THINGS.

THERE IS A FAILURE TO HAVE A BALANCE HERE.

I'LL SAY SOMETHING THAT IS SACRILEGE ON PBS BUT KEN BURNS IS REALLY GOOD BUT ALSO BY PEOPLE OF COLOR, THEY CAN DO GREAT WORK.

WE DON'T HAVE TO JUST RELY ON KEN BURNS.

PBS COULD EXPAND THEIR LENS A BIT HERE.

>> YES, I WANT TO SAY I BELIEVE I'M THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS DISCUSSION THAT NOT ONLY HAS DONG LONG FORM DOCUMENT RIS ON PBS AND CONSULTED FOR OTHER SERIES, ALSO BEING A PART OF MANY OF THESE PIPELINE PROGRAMS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO AT THE END GET MORE PERSONS OF COLOR INTO THE PBS PIPELINE AND WITH RARE COMPENSATION MANY OF THOSE EXCEPTIONAL FILM MAKERS HAVE RARELY FOUND A SPACE ON PBS.

KENJI BURNS TAKES UP A LOT OF SPACE.

NOBODY ANSWER SAYING HE'S NOT GOOD.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE -- NOBODY PAPS SAYING HE'S NOT GOOD.

BUT TWO OF THE PEOPLE WHO SIGNED THE LETTER, SAM POLLARD STANLEY NELSON GET A FAIR AMOUNT OF TIME ON PBS.

WHY THEN DID THEY SIGN THIS LETTER?

BECAUSE THEY KNOW HOW MANY ABSORPTION KEN BURNS IS TAKING UP FROM OTHER BRILLIANT PEOPLE.

I'M TALKING ABOUT OSCAR NOMINATED, EMMY NOMINATED.

IT'S STUNNING THE KIND OF TALENT THEY HAVE AND YET WE ARE STILL TALKING ABOUT THIS.

AND WITH REGARD TO CONTENT IN KEN BURNS FILM.

LISTEN MOST OF THE TIME HE'S ON POINT BUT IN 2007 HE GOT IN A WHOLE HAPPY OF TROUBLE, WHICH HE NEVER ANSWERED, LEAVING OUT LATINOS.

WE'RE WORKING HARD ON OUR DWREFORT, WE WANT TO MAKE SPACE.

THERE IS A LOT TO CONSIDER BUT LET'S CONSIDER ALL THE FACTS.

>> Rooney: PAULA KERGER SAID, SHE HAD A LITTLE ANGER BUT SHE REVISED IT.

WE DID NOTHING BUT TALK ABOUT KEN BURNS.

THEY CLAIM IT'S NO ABOUT KEN BURNS, FOR THE RECORD, IT IS ALL ABOUT KEN BURNS.

IT'S RESENTIMENT A WHITE GUY HAS -- >> IT'S ABOUT HOW MUCH SPACE HE HAS.

I'M TELLING YOU WHAT IT'S ABOUT.

>> Rooney: YES ABOUT KEN BURNS.

>> THERE ARE TWO PEOPLE ON THAT LIST THAT NOT ONLY GET ON PBS BUT ON OTHER PLATFORMS.

THEY ARE SIGNING THEIR NAMES TO SAY THE PEOPLE I'VE BEEN IN THE PIPELINE PROGRAMS WITH STILL DO NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY.

>> Rooney: THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY IS, I DIDN'T SEE ASIAN AMERICANS BUT IT'S POSSIBLY NOT AS GOOD AS SOME OF CEJ BURNS PROGRAMS TOO.

>> I WILL THROW THAT OUT IF IT'S TRUE.

I'M TELLING YOU WHO'S ON THE LIST AND WHO'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LIST.

I'M TALKING ABOUT OSCAR NOMINATED SUNDANCE, HE HAS ONLY TWO OSCAR NOMINATIONS AND SOME PLEAMS.

>> Rooney: THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE NOT GOOD.

>> I KNOW.

>> Rooney: ALL RIGHT.

THERE'S A LONGSTANDING IDEAL OF THE JOURNALIST AS AN OBJECTIVE OBSERVER, STANDING APART FROM THE STORIES THEY COVER, AND KEEPING ANY PERSONAL FEELINGS OUT OF THE MIX.

BUT OVER THE PAST YEAR, THE BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT HAS SPARKED A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER THAT APPROACH IS REALISTIC OR EVEN DESIRABLE.

NOW, THAT RECKONING IS CONTINUING AT "THE WASHINGTON POST," WITH A DIFFERENT TOPIC TAKING CENTER STAGE.

ADAM REILLY HAS MORE.

>> Reporter: BACK IN 2018, REPORTER FELICIA SONMEZ MADE HEADLINES AFTER ACCUSING JOURNALIST JONATHAN KAIMAN OF SEXUAL ASSAULT.

LAST YEAR, SHE WAS SUSPENDED BY THE "WASHINGTON POST" AFTER SENDING THIS TWEET IN THE WAKE OF KOBE BRYANT'S DEATH, NOTING THE BELOVED N.B.A.

STAR WAS ONCE ACCUSED OF RAPE.

NOW, SOMNEZ IS BACK THE NEWS AFTER REVEALING THAT, STARTING IN 2018, THE "POST" BARRED HER FROM COVERING STORIES INVOLVING METOO AND CLAIMS OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.

AFTER THAT REVELATION SPARKED AN OUTCRY, SONMEZ SAID THAT BAN HAS BEEN LIFTED, TWEETING: "THIS IS GOOD NEWS, BUT IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT IT HAD TO COME AT SUCH A HIGH EMOTIONAL TOLL, AND AFTER MY DISTRESS WAS DISMISSED FOR YEARS."

APPARENTLY, THE DEBATE OVER JOURNALISTIC SUBJECTIVITY STILL HASN'T BEEN RESOLVED.

>> Rooney: I'M GOING TO GO OUT ON A LIMB HERE AND SAY, THERE PROBABLY WERE OTHER THINGS AT WORK THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT.

BUT THE ISSUE THAT YOU CAN'T COVER SOMETHING, IF THERE'S A MURDER IN THE FAMILY, YOU CAN'T COVER A MURDER.

WHAT ABOUT CANCER, HEALTH ISSUES, THE NOTION IS CRAZY.

>> THE APPROXIMATE PROBLEM HERE, BIAS BRINGING A LIVED EXPERIENCE TO YOUR COVERAGE COMES UP, THAT'S JUST IT.

THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT EVERYBODY WHO COMES FROM -- HAS A LIVED EXPERIENCE AND THEN MAY REPORT ON A SUBJECT MATTER THAT INVOLVES THAT, DOES NOT HAVE TO HAVE AN EDITOR, WE ARE JOURNALISTS, WE HAVE AN EDITOR.

BUT TO SAY SHE DOESN'T BRING SOMETHING ELSE TO THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE OF HER LIVED EXPERIENCE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT'S JUST YOU KNOW OFF.

AND PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU LOOK AROUND THE NEWSROOM AND SEE THAT RULE NOT BEING APPLIED TO EVERYBODY ELSE.

IF WE APPLIED THE RULE THEY APPLIED TO HER TO THE WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENTS THAT ROOM WOULD BE EMPTY.

>> Rooney: THAT'S TRUE.

>> I AGREE, THIS WAS A RIDICULOUS RULE AND IT NEVER MADE ANY SENSE.

THERE IS AS MUCH AN ISSUE OF SOCIAL MEDIA, THE "WASHINGTON POST" IS JUST VERY CONSERVATIVE ABOUT THESE THINGS.

SHE SPOKE OUT IN BOTH INSTANCES ON SOCIAL MEDIA, THEY TEND TO HAVE A KNEE JERK REACTION TO THAT.

I THINK IT'S A FALLACY THAT IF YOU ARE SOMEONE WHO HAS EXPERIENCED SEXUAL ASSAULT YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO COVER IT, IN FACT, COVERING SEXUAL ASSAULT IS VERY DIFFICULT, OFTEN VICTIMS FEEL RETRAUMATIZED, THE WAY IT'S REPORTED ON.

HAVING SOMEONE IN THAT POSITION IS A BENEFIT, IN MY OPINION.

IT WAS ODD FROM THE START.

>> Rooney: PERHAPS, WE DON'T KNOW.

>> THERE IS THE SOCIAL MEDIA ISSUE AND THERE'S WHETHER SOMEONE WITH A LIVED EXPERIENCE IS -- CAN STILL BE OBJECTIVE.

I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT THE THING THAT GOT THE REPORTER IN TROUBLE WASN'T HER REPORTING.

IT WAS HER REACTING TO A STORY IN WHICH SWHE WAS NOT REPORTING ANYTHING.

IT WAS HER REACTION ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

BLUT I THINK ONE -- BUT I THINK ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT DIVERSIFICATION IN A NEWSROOM, YOU'RE BRINGING DIFFERENT IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES INTO A PLACE THAT FRANKLY HASN'T HAD A LOT OF THEM FOR DECADES AND DECADES AND DECADES.

I THINK IT'S ONLY NORMAL THAT THERE IS SOME QUESTIONING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE CAN COVER AND WHAT PEOPLE CAPTAIN.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BAR FOR OBJECTIVITY IS SET AT THE WHITE MALE EXPERIENCE AND THAT'S NOT REALLY THE CASE ANYMORE.

AND REALLY, NEVER HAS BEEN.

BUT NOW THERE ARE PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AND DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES WHO ARE ABLE TO INFORM THE REPORTING, AND I THINK THERE'S STILL A BIT OF A -- YOU KNOW, OF A BLOCK THERE.

IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN LIVE THROUGH SOMETHING AS TRAUMATIC AS WHAT THIS REPORTER LIVED THROUGH, AND STILL COVER IT.

BUT YOU CAN.

AND YOU SHOULD.

>> WELL, FUNDAMENTALLY, THIS IS ABOUT A MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHAT OBJECTIVITY IS.

IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU WERE NEUTRAL IN THOUGHT, WORD AND DEED.

IT MEANS THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO GO OUT AND REPORT A STORY AND PURSUE THE TRUTH IN A FAIR AND OPEN MINDED WAY.

AND WHAT WAS SURPRISING ABOUT THIS FROM THE BEGINNING IS THAT MARTY BARRON, THE JUST RETIRED EDITOR OF THE "WASHINGTON POST," HAS SPOKEN ABOUT IT QUITE ELOQUENTLY AND YET FELICIA SONMEZ WAS SINGLED OUT AS SOMEONE WHO COULD NOT REPORT OBJECTIVELY.

I THINK THAT'S A MISTAKE FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT ALL THE REST OF YOU HAVE SAID.

I'M GLAD THAT THIS HAS FINALLY BEEN REVERSED AND I THINK THAT LET'S HOPE WE DON'T SEE SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN.

>> Rooney: WELL, SUSIE ONE OF THE PROBLEMS OF THIS CASE WAS ONE OF THE PERSONS SHE ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ASSAULT WAS ANOTHER REPORTER OR I SHOULD SAY A BUREAU CHIEF AT THE "WASHINGTON POST."

THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEY WERE BOTH DRUNK OR HAD A LOT TO DRINK.

IF YOU READ THE DETAILS, IT'S A HORRIBLE STORY, IT'S GROTESQUE BUT HAVING SOMEBODY ELSE HAVING ACCUSED HIM OF THE SAME BEHAVIOR I WONDER IF THAT DIDN'T PLAY INTO IT, THAT IT WAS SOMEONE ELSE AT THE "WASHINGTON POST"?

>> YEAH, ALTHOUGH I STILL THINK IT IS NOT A JOB TO PASS JUDGMENT ON WHAT SOMEONE'S EXPERIENCE IS ON SEXUAL ASSAULT RIGHT?

WHETHER THEY BRIEF HER OR NOT, IS BESIDE THE POINT, RIGHT?

THE FACT IS SHE'S STILL ABLE TO DO HER JOB.

IF SHE'S NOT ABLE TO DO HER JOB, THAT'S ANOTHER CONVERSATION BUT BANNING HER FROM ANYTHING THAT SEEMS TO RELATE TO SEXUAL ASSAULT I THINK IS OVERKILL.

>> Rooney: THEY WERE ANNOYED ABOUT THE KOBIE BRYANT TWEET.

>> THE TIMING SET IT OFF.

>> Rooney: I AGREE WITH THAT.

IT'S TIME FOR OUR RANTS AND RAVES STARTING WITH SUSIE.

>> MY, MY RANTS IS ABOUT ALL THE THE DOG BITES MAN STORIES.

I KNOW WE ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO COVER THIS WHITE HOUSE, THEY ARE DELIBERATELY VERY BORING SO ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS THE MEDIA IS DYING TO FIND AN ANGLE ON.

BUT I THINK WE JUMPED THE SHARK THIS WEEK WHEN ONE OF THE DOGS POOPED IN THE WHITE HOUSE WHICH IS A THING THAT DOGS DO, THIS IS AN OLDER DOG, A DOG 12 OR 13, CHAMP AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULDN'T DOG-SHAME THESE FOR DOGS.

>> Rooney: SUSIE I HAVE TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I MISSED THE WHOLE STORY.

THERE IS A LOT OF DOG-SHAMING AND I MISSED THAT.

ALL RIGHT, DAN.

>> IS THERE ANYTHING WORSE THAN THE MEDIA DIPPING INTO APRIL FOOL'S DAY PRANKS?

I DID KIND OF LIKE GBH, BUT I HAVE A RANT FOR THE ARONCO TIMES, WHICH IS NOT A REAL NEWS SOURCE BUT THEY BILL THEMSELVES AS A WEBSITE DESIGNED THE TELL POSITIVE STORIES ABOUT WHAT MONTGOMERY COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, THIS WEEK THEY ROON STORY SAYING YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO GET COVID VACCINES AT YOUR LOCAL WAWA DELI.

EVEN FAKE MESSAGE FROM A DOCTOR, EACH OF OUR WAWA DELI EMPLOYEES HAD AN HOUR WORTH OF INSTRUCTION TO INNOCULATE A CITRUS.

WE CONTACTED THE WAWA DELI AND THEY SAID THEY HAD ABSOLUTELY FLOG TO DO WITH IT.

>> Rooney: REMEMBER THE INFAMOUS VOLCANO AT THE BLUE HILLS?

I MEAN, DIDN'T SOMEBODY LOSE THEIR JOB OVER THAT?

YEAH.

>> I THINK I BELIEVE THAT ONE.

>> Rooney: YOU BELIEVED IT?

THAT WAS A WHILE AGO.

ALL RIGHT CALLIE.

>> I HAVE A RAVE ABOUT INDIAN WATCH TODAY, THEY ARE CHORD ANCHORED AT THE ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY AT THE WALTER CRONKITE SCHOOL OF JOURNALISM.

THEY ARE LOOKING AT NEWS ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND BRINGING IT EVERY NIGHT SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T JUST NARROWLY THINKING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE LIVES OF NATIVE AMERICANS AND THEY'RE DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB.

THIS IS A HUGE LEAP FROM WHERE THE NEWSPAPER WAS ITSELF.

THEY BROUGHT THAT UP TO JUST A GREAT DIGITAL EDITION AND NOW THIS IS THE NEXT ITERATION OF IT.

>> Rooney: WHERE ARE THEY GETTING THE RESOURCES?

SOME OF THEIR PHOTOGRAPHY WAS JUST UNBELIEVABLE.

>> ALL OVER.

MARK TRAYAN HAS DONE THINGS FOR FRONT LINE HERE, HE'S A WELL-KNOWN NATIVE AMERICAN JOURNALIST.

HE HAS BEEN PUSHING PUSHING PUSHING THIS ROCK UP THE HILL.

I'M SO EXCITED TO SEE THE RESULTS, IT'S BEEN WONDERFUL.

>> Rooney: ALL RIGHT, LYLAH.

>> I HAVE A RAVE FOR LEST TER HOLT WHO REVIVED THE TRUTH VERSUS OBJECTIVITY DEBATE, WHEN ACCEPTING A JOURNALISM AWARD.

WHEN PEOPLE ARE SAYING THAT FAIRNESS IS KIND OF THE OPPOSITE OF TRUTH, YOU CAN'T GOT TO TRUTH WITHOUT GOING FOR FAIRNESS.

I THINK THERE IS A REAL DANGER IN THE MEDIA I'VE SAID IT OVER AND OVER ABOUT LOOKING FOR FALSE EQUIVALENCE, -- EQUIVALENT EQUIVALENT EQUIVALENCY.

>> TALKING ABOUT THE SPREADING OF MISINFORMATION, SEEN LOT OF THAT, PUSHING BACK THE TWO LAWS HAD AS WITH FOX NEWS, HE WAS KIND OF ALLUDING TO THAT, THE RESPONSIBILITY A NEWS MEDIA HAS IN SPREADING DISINFORMATION.

>>> I FINALLY HAVE A RAVE I THINK FOR SOMEONE I DON'T REALLY WATCH THAT OFTEN IS GREG GUTTFELD, A LATE NIGH HOST OF A SHOW ON FOX, THEY'VE GIVEN HIM A PRIME TIME NETWORK SHOW THAT'S GOING TO GO UP AGAINST COLIN O'BRIEN AND THE OTHER LATE NIGHT SHOWS.

HE HAS A CORE AUDIENCE, I'VE ONLY CAUGHT HIM RADIO FEW TIMES.

BUT HE HAS A NICE MANNER.

HE MIGHT NOT BE YOURS AND HE DOES HAVE A CONSERVATIVE BENT ON THINGS BUS IT'S DIFFERENT.

AND YOU HAVE TO ADMIT THAT THE GENRE OF LATE-NIGHT TALK IS PRETTY SIMILAR.

IT'S ALL THE SAME PRETTY MUCH, JOKES ON TRUMP AND ALL THAT.

THIS IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

LET'S GIVE IT A TRY, HOPE IT WORKS, 11:00 HERE, 8:00 ON THE WEST COAST AND IT WILL BE LIVE.

THAT IS IT FOR OUR SHOW.

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK.

E-MAIL US, TWEET US.

SEND US A COMMENT.

I'M EMILY ROONEY.

THANKS FOR WATCHING.