CHAPTERS: ME AND TED AGAINST THE WORLD:
The Unauthorized Story Of The Founding Of CNN
By Reese Schonfeld

The Big Stunt

It is now mid-February, 2001. If I were running CNN, we'd still be in the midst of the story of my dreams, not to mention the story of Ted's dreams. For me, it would have been the stunt beyond all stunts. For Ted, it would have been the chance to grab center stage in the battle between George W. Bush and Al Gore, maybe even to determine the next President of the United States. Ted would have loved it. He sure would have been one of "the most powerful men in the world."

If we were doing it my way, CNN would still be mixing it up with Fox News, John Ellis (George Bush's cousin who ran the Fox election desk), and the Brothers Bush. CNN would have launched a lawsuit in November charging Fox with disclosing proprietary Voter News Service (VNS) material to the Bushes. In the midst of all the counts and recounts, Ted Turner would have charged that Ellis and Fox had stolen VNS information that belonged to the news consortium of which CNN was a member. Ted would proclaim that Fox had aided and abetted the Bush boys as they stole the election from the American people. Ted would have been on camera playing a role befitting his position as the owner of CNN.

In court, CNN's lawyers would have been charging George W. and Jeb Bush; Fox News; and John Ellis with the misuse of confidential information for their own ends. This is not just a newsman's stunt, if it works, it forces the Bush brothers to testify under oath about the election.

CNN has a pretty good case. There's no question that Ellis was in possession of vital, confidential information that was of great value to the Bush brothers and that belonged in part to CNN. Ellis admitted talking to his cousins repeatedly about information that was coming to him in his role as head of Fox News election desk. CNN would ask for damages from Fox, Ellis and maybe even the Bush brothers because they had misused the information that Ellis had given them.

The only question is, what exactly did John Ellis tell his cousins? CNN would have been taking sworn depositions from Ellis, Jeb and George W. to determine the answer. In December, John Ellis made things worse for himself . He wrote a piece for Inside magazine and, in attempting to explain his actions, he dug himself in even deeper. When the story first broke in the New Yorker, Jane Mayer wrote that Ellis had called his cousin in the evening and told him the exit polls looked bad. In Inside, Ellis confessed that his first call from George W. Bush came through about 2:15 PM, giving the brothers plenty of time to talk together and redirect the tide.

As it prepared for the trial, CNN would investigate the various measures taken by the state of Florida on Election Day, especially what role Jeb Bush played in the process, what actions he took and when he took them. Perhaps the timeline thus established would reveal that, following George W.'s 2:15 PM conversation with cousin John Ellis, Jeb had taken special measures to slow down voting in some precincts, to really bring out the vote in others because he knew where the Bush vote was coming from. If CNN discovered that, it would have been one helluva deposition.

John Ellis had done his best to cover himself. In his Inside magazine piece, he wrote that George Bush was "considerate of my position. He knew that I would be fired if I gave him anything that VNS deemed confidential, so he never asked for it. He made a point of getting the early exit poll data from other sources (italics added) before talking to me. Sure enough, he had the exact numbers from key states." If depositions took place, CNN would inquire, under oath, who those "other sources" were. Would George W. blow the whistle on them? If it wasn't John Ellis, who gave Bush "the exact numbers" from the "early exit poll data"? Maybe CNN would have to sue somebody else, but the whole world would know a lot more about what happened on Election Day.

It would be easy to pretend that the lawsuit had been filed solely in the name of truth and good journalism. That wouldn't be entirely true. The suit would have been a "stunt."

A great journalistic "stunt" that would have brought hundreds of thousand of viewers to CNN. CNN would have become part of the story, a major player. The media would have had to cover us along with the Bush team and the Gore team. CNN would be making motions and awaiting decisions in Federal Court and in state court. MSNBC, Fox, the other networks, they'd have to stake us out and I'd have Ted Turner on the courthouse steps opposed to Warren Christopher and Jim Baker. I'll take that match-up anytime.

With any kind of luck, CNN would wind up in the Supreme Court, and the cameras and reporters would follow every step of the way. With the best of luck, we'd be taking depositions for months, and the media would be covering us all the way. As it was, the Election story died on December 13th when the Supreme Court handed down its decision. The next day the total ratings for the three cable news networks dropped forty-three percent. I'll bet that if CNN had taken Fox to court, the story would have gone on for months longer and the ratings would have stayed up for months longer. That's what stunts are all about.

CNN would have had to make it clear that it hadn't brought the lawsuit to help Al Gore. CNN's position should have been, " We're suing on behalf of all Americans. We're trying to keep the election honest; trying to make sure that all the votes get counted and that nobody gets away with cheating." CNN declares itself the fair and square network; everything's on the up-and-up with CNN. I think Ted Turner would read those lines terrifically.

The best thing about the stunt is that it was justifiable. Last years election did not pass the smell test. Most Americans know that, but the press seems to have forgotten it. By keeping the issue alive, CNN would have differentiated itself from the rest of the pack and won the loyalty of viewers who thought they had been conned by the Bushes and the Supreme Court. I'm sure there are enough of them so that CNN would have beaten Fox in the January ratings.

Now for the downside. I know that if CNN had played "let's depose the Bushes", Republicans would've shouted, "Liberal press bias!" I think that's an acceptable risk

What the hell, they shout that anyway.

They'd also shout "Hanoi Jane all over again", "Rick Kaplan slept in the White House", (by election day Rick Kaplan slept with the fishes), and they'd continue to call CNN the Clinton News Network.

But it's about time that CNN adopted an openly controversial attitude; after all, Fox has adopted an actively conservative attitude, and it's now number one.

The above is pure daydream. Last month, I had lunch with a senior executive at an AOL Time Warner company. When I told him about my daydream, he laughed, then he turned white. "We couldn't do that", he said, and of course he was right. AOL Time Warner needs too many approvals from the federal government to take on the guy who might be the next president of the United States.

But, Me and Ted could have done it. I thought Me and Ted were two guys who could take on anybody.

Reese Schonfeld is the author of Me And Ted Against The World. He founded the Cable News Network with Ted Turner in 1979, and served as its first President and CEO. At CNN, he originated the 24 hour news concept. After leaving CNN, he developed News Twelve on Long Island, Newschannel 8, and the TV Food Network. A graduate of Dartmouth College, Schonfeld received M.A. and law degrees from Columbia University. He can be reached through his website, MeAndTed.com