1. Brendan says

    I’ll show *her* what vicious is… I don’t advocate violence, but I can’t help but be angered and offended by her “journalism”.

  2. Come on says

    Oh Brendan relax! She acknowledged their mistake and made amends. That is more then what most networks would do (Faux News in particular). What more do you want? Move on. Why is it when people make mistakes, acknowledge it, people still aren’t satisfied and want blood?

  3. William says

    Come on: she could’ve have acknowledged the mistake and even touted her past fairness and it all may have been somewhat soothed. But then she decided to play the the victim and that’s BS.

  4. Darren says

    An apology that never would have come had they not received email complaints.. and again dredging up the “fierce advocate” in words.. yet the deeds speak differently. If she really had a grasp of LGBT issues she would have at the very LEAST had someone on to counter Cohen’s views. She didn’t.. and basically that’s one sided reporting.

  5. homogenius says

    Did you hear that you bad little queers? If you don’t behave you won’t get any civil rights. Now go to your room before I take away your TV privileges, too.

    Note to Kyra: HomoGee’s Rule #3: Don’t get pissy on your own show–it makes you look like a douchenozzle.

  6. Christopher says

    Oh honey. We don’t think you’re a homophobe. We think you’re a shitty journalist.

  7. Disgusted American says

    there’s nothing to discuss Kyra…there’s NOTHING wrong with Gay people…NOTHING!!!! There’s NOTHING to DEBATE!

  8. Don says

    If she were such an advocate, she wouldn’t be debating discredited crackpots espousing theories that not a single shread of evidence supports and only inviting on the knowledgeable authorities after we have sent her our vicious comments. If she is going to play this ratings game then she should pull herself together and take responsibility for her actions. She could just as easily have figured out he was “not appropriate” before she invited him on her show.

  9. says

    How dare she as a (presumably) straight person tell gay people how to feel or how to express those feelings? What CNN did was offensive and just because she’s some “fierce advocate” doesn’t make it any less so.

  10. Trasker says

    No Kyra, journalism happens before you go on the air. You should give us ‘the respect we deserve’ before you go with your story…not afterwards after you are called out on it. I still have not turned CNN on since this happened. Just the last straw. No tv news at all anymore. Somewhat liberating actually.

  11. Bill says

    I think her apology was well stated and appreciated that she made her personal position clear on GLBT rights.


  12. Wes says

    “… a world where all people are treated with the respect that they deserve”

    That’s just it. People ‘deserve’ varying levels of respect, some not at all.

    We don’t have to treat every issue as a 50/50 just to appear ‘fair and balanced’. Thats CNN’s biggest problem IMO, they neuter everything in their crusade to appear unbiased to the point of being totally worthless. It reminds me of when the BBC asked on their “have your say” thing whether Uganda should go ahead and kill gays. THERE IS A RIGHT POSITION AND A WRONG POSITION, NO 50/50 “HAVE YOUR SAY” DEBATE IT OUT BULLSH*T

  13. Chitown Kev says

    Yes, she should have vetted Cohen’s credentials before she went on the air.

    That’s called taking responsibility.

    I wonder if someone had an expert on talking about a woman’s capacity to effectively work while she’s in her pre-menstrual cycle, how she would feel about that.

    Maybe then she’d be a little more understanding of a “lack of civility”

    Not a true amends, in this case, it was only those “vicious comments” that got Kyra to back with this.

    Not sincere.

  14. TANK says

    She didn’t take responsibility for anything. The only semi-respectable comment made by her out of this is that she admitted that cohen was “not the most appropriate guest”. She didn’t call call inappropriate, which she should have. This is not two sides of a debate. There aren’t two sides of the evolution debate (creationism isn’t science), nor are there two sides of the holocaust “debate” (holocaust denialists are not credible). This isn’t journalism; it’s sensationalism for ratings. Until she gets that, this acknowledgement of the controversey (as it wasn’t an apology) is woefully inadequate.

  15. says

    If they were going to have Richard Cohen on (a highly dubious choice) then they should have had the facts presented by this guest in that interview, not days later after protest. But at least it shows that our e-mails (I was among those who sent one) had an effect and that she was willing to address them.

    I hope she learned from this that what “journalism is all about” is doing your homework so that guests with no credibility are not given credibility on your news program. Assuming a mainstream audience would understand her “record” on human rights when there was no indication of it in the piece doesn’t cut it.

    She and CNN were lazy, and we held them accountable. It worked. As for the viciousness accusations, I find it counter-productive to be vicious. It distracts from the rational arguments. But people will vent their anger, so any journalist who is intentionally provocative–as she clearly was in this segment–should understand provocations produce strong responses.

  16. Taylor says

    Kyra, it shouldn’t make a bit of difference if we watch your newscast everyday…or if we only saw it on that particular day.

    You have a responsibility every single day to make sure that what is aired is FACTUAL!! It wasn’t…so you deserve every bit of the ire you’ve received. YOU ARE NOT THE VICTIM HERE! So don’t play one. Just do better next time.

    If you don’t want to receive “vicious emails”, then don’t create the opportunity for people to write them.

  17. daftpunkydavid says

    i think too many in the “gay community” have a complex, which manifests itself anytime something like the kyra phillips reporting story on tuesday, or the macmillen story earlier, pops up, and which is, imho, one that underlies how “we” have evolved to resemble our peers in civil rights fights (the adl, the naacp come to mind): very quick to respond (a good thing), but also sometimes to the detriment of facts.

    from the get-go, i thought this latest episode was blown out of proportion. i mean, are we really so insecure as to refuse to engage in civil discussion, and engage and debunk what this cohen guy was saying?

    i understand those who say that such challenges to the very nature of a group would not be tolerable today were they to apply to other minorities. i happen to agree with that opinion. but what we forget in drawing parallels with our own civil rights fight is that these other group did very much have to go through rounds and rounds of discussions, and that today, suggesting that “jews are …” or “blacks are …” will immediately discredit whoever is making those statements.

    the same thing is happening for gays, but we’re not quite there yet. and perhaps this outrage-over-everything approach will get us there faster, but i’m not convinced. i think good ole’ arguments, discussion, deliberations are the remedy to this malady.

    enjoy the whether if you’re in the city today!!

  18. yonkersconquers says

    It’s not about her. I’m sure her heart is golden and I don’t need to look into it to believe her commitment to equality, I really don’t.

    It’s about the fact that her show gave airtime to an “ex-gay” crackpot who has been discredited by every major American psychological association in America.

    If Phillips is going to cite her commitment to journalism then shouldn’t she do her own research? I mean, two Google clicks tell you all you need to know about this quack.

    I think the people who sent her hate mail are appalling. Clearly her program was offensive but that kind of behavior is inexcusable.

    But like I say, it’s not about her. It’s about the lives of gay people who are actually defamed and belittled by this kind of “discussion.”

    She should realize that she’s tackling an issue, but gay people are fighting for their equality and – often – their very lives. Until she grasps that – and she doesn’t seem to yet – she’s learned little from this exchange.

  19. dcposter says

    I kinda agree she didn’t need to lecture her viewers, but I also agree that IDIOTS who send over-the-top flame e-mails at the drop of a hat are doing this cause no good. Rage is real but rarely productive in debates on issues about which people disagree.

    It’s too easy to send anonymous, not-very-well-thought-out electronic messages that ultimately can do more damage than good. Think before hitting the send button.

  20. dizzy spins says

    @DaftPunkDavid–if there was a gay term for an Uncle Tom, I’d call you it. Maybe an Auntie Maime?

  21. Jack M says

    She needs to go to the mall and buy herself some big girl panties. Looks like she can dish it out, but can’t take it. And we’re supposed to feel sorry for HER?

  22. pParkerT says

    I think this is the problem with “journalism” today. Instead of presenting the facts, they allow one side to present their lies as if they were an equally valid alternative to the truth. See: The Iraq War, HCR, etc, etc, etc.

  23. iew says

    One question, Kyra, dear friend, in the intrest of good and balanced reporting, was Dr. Anderson scheduled before or after the vicious emails? Not that it’s important in the ‘balance of things,’ you understand, it’s just important in the ‘perception’ of the ‘balance’ of things.

  24. daftpunkydavid says

    hey dizzy spins… thanks for taking the time to answer my post, even though you’d like to call me a “gay term for an Uncle Tom […] maybe an Auntie Maime”.

    i don’t know why you would like to resort to name calling. please go ahead and express your opinion, or attack my opinion with other arguments, but there’s no reason to resort to name calling (unless, of course, you don’t have arguments).

    i wholeheartedly agree with what kyra phillips said in her segment. i think showing this guy for who he is, without trying to sugar-coat it for ever-so-gullible-america can be a fruitful means to expose the absurd nature of the beliefs he espouses.

    now, if you disagree, go ahead and say what you think. your argument shouldn’t hinge on finding the equivalent of a gay uncle tom.

  25. ravewulf says

    I agree with @Come On. During that broadcast I could see her getting nervous with THAT guy on. I don’t think they properly researched who he was before they put him on and didn’t realize what he would try to do. He’s more of a salesman than he is worth getting any info out of. They did mess up, and now they are apologizing and putting up a counter argument.

    As Cenk on The Young Turks would say, You’re at a 10 when you need to be at a 2. Bring it down a bit.

  26. says

    “i think good ole’ arguments, discussion, deliberations are the remedy to this malady.”

    You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.

    This idiot shouldn’t have been on in the first place, and would easily have been vetted through a simple Google search. That’s why I’m thinking it was done on purpose, for ratings. Given that assumption, I rather think that any reasonable degree of bilious venting is appopriate in this case, regardless of what is or is not contained inside Kyra’s heart.

  27. jvogel says

    it’s amazing how many of your lives she ruined by running that little segment.

    seriously, people – move on. stop attacking petty journalists and fight battles that will produce actual results.

    who cares what she or Cohen have to say? If some poor little homosexual watched his segment and as a result became convinced that his sexuality was bad and that he should (and could) change it – that’s his own damn fault. We are all responsible for educating ourselves. The homosexual in question would have likely reached this conclusion with or without that broadcast.

    The segment was dumb and pointless and uneducated and not worth our malice or energy.

  28. NickC says

    I think I’m even more offended by her outrage over the “vicious” response than by her original show.

    Richard Cohen has been widely exposed as a total nutcase. Even the other ex-gay groups steer a wide berth around him. There is truly no excuse for Philips to give him a platform to continue to spout his quackery.

    If she had brought on a Joseph Nicolosi (NARTH) or Alan Chambers (Exodus), I’d give her some leeway to wanting to represent the other side of the debate. But with Cohen, she went straight for the bottom of the barrel.

    Don’t get me wrong, as an ex-ex-gay myself (, I don’t respect any of these bozos. But some of them maintain at least a pretense of rationality. Cohen dropped that long ago. Philips deserves to be flamed for giving him a platform.

  29. daftpunkydavid says

    @ the milkman: oh absolutely, she was absolutely trying to sensationalize the topic. if anything, that’s what she should be blamed for (along with the rest of the media).

    but think about it this way, would we have been having this discussion if she had invited someone like today’s guest on tuesday or if she herself was more aggressive in challenging cohen’s assertions?

    this is not the first time cohen has been on tv, so i’m not sure it’s the fact that he’s given a platform that disturbs people, but rather that he’s given a platform with no real challenger (the other guy on tuesday was kinda weak imho).

  30. TANK says

    How does one retain a pretense of rationality when the “reports” they use to substnatiate them are provably false, and universally acknowledged as such by the mainstream psychiatric communities? The fact is that you can’t. There is no “other side” to this issue.

  31. GGREEN says

    “Richard Cohen was not the most appropriate guest to have on, but it is a decision that we made and the result of that is our continued discussion today. That is what journalism is all about.”

    No stupid, journalism is about reporting the news not making it up or being the news.

  32. alguien says

    dear kyra,

    thank you for (somewhat belatedly) offering an apology and (finally) presenting a differing, more responsible point of view.

    i am sorry you’ve received hateful messages calling you on your reporting of this. i hope, since the worst thing i called you was “ill informed” that i am not included among those.

    i take exception to your defense of presenting mr. cohen with the rather patronizing statement “this is what journalism is all about.” i’m not a journalist but i’m pretty sure journalism is about investigation and positing questions that challenge people like mr. cohen instead of letting them present their misinformed opinions without any sort of counterpoint.

    i don’t believe that is what journalism is all about.

    i have no doubt that you are sincere in your “unswerving commitment for all communities” but i wonder if it goes beyond mere lip service.

    that said, your apology, while a welcome step forward, was incomplete at best and disingenuous at its worst.


  33. Steve says

    She gets zero credit for this defiant, condescending lecture. There’s no apology anywhere in this.

  34. sal(yes the original) says

    fine i can do with a debate,but not with some crack head!!!!!!!!!!!!thank u

  35. says

    It’s nice that she saw the error of her ways and apologized. However, she addresses this incident as if it’s an “Is Kyra a good person who gays should like and support?” issue, when the issue is that regardless of her personal beliefs, she allowed a very harmful segment to be aired…and that segment, with or without regrets, can NOT be taken back. She is also still clinging to the idea that homosexuality is up for debate so therefore it’s journalistic to have on people who advocate curing it.

  36. says

    I’d like to present a different take on this. First, Cohen is an excellent choice for a guest. That being said, Kyra should have invited someone else on to counter his bullshit. Absent of any opposition, she should take that mantle on herself and call him to the floor. In this day and age of instant celebrities and a 24 hour news cycle, that’s how you make a name for yourself.

    Sadly, I’ve seen this time and time again with CNN. The worst being Campbell Brown who almost always allows nut jobs to go on and on without calling them out. Most notably when that wingnut was going on about “death panels” and said it was right there in the legislation and plops a huge stack of papers on her desk for effect. Right then and there, she should have said “show me.”

    Soledad, where is the report on “Gay in America.” Now that could earn our respect. For now, CNN’s latest numbers show they have dropped by 40% in viewership since 2005. I expect a big shakeup on the horizon. They can start by firing the program director, Wolf and Campbell (The Grey Fox is rumored to be talking to CBS) and bring back Crossfire and have that snarky little dike from GQ that’s frequently on MSNBC to host against someone we love to hate like, Tucker. THAT could be fun!

  37. Come on says

    Or…how about some young gay kid saw this interview and saw Cohen for the idiot he really is? Why are you so quick to under estimate our youth? In that same vein, why would that kid that you under estimate even be watching CNN? Why not MTV? Seems to me if they are smart enough to watch the news and be informed they are smart enought to see through this quack’s stupidity and the fact that you can’t cure “the gay” out of people. Food for thought.

  38. Jackson says

    A. This isn’t the first time she’s exhibited this kind of reprehensible attitude towards gays, as mentioned on this site. I think she’s lying b/c her ass got caught being stupid & now she wants to come off as the good girl.

    B. They had the option to put GLAAD on and address this BEFORE the majority of the e-mails came in and guess what? They cancelled their appearance at the 11th hour citing their right to cover an issue in a balanced way (which for them meant no pro-gay gays). GLAAD subsequently did their call to action and put their e-mails out on the internet. I suspect THAT was when the snit hit the fan… or her e-mail account.

    I think she deserved to be chewed out. Maybe this will make her & other anchors/producers at CNN think in the future. I somehow doubt it, though.

  39. MikeMick says

    If she was as tuned into queer issues as she claims to be, then she either wouldn’t have invited that wingnut Cohen onto the show, or she would have clearly debunked and rebuked him on the air. She did not.

  40. Happily Married says

    With friends like these, who needs enemies? What a lame “apology”– or rather, explanation. It’s all about her. Poor poor misunderstood Kyra. She may say she is on our side but she doesn’t really get it. It’s like the lady who was the hostess at “El Coyote” who gave money to Yes on 8 to deny us marriage equality, who was then flabbergasted that we were angry with her when she “really really loves us and has so many gay friends…and didn’t mean any harm…”

  41. Norm D PLume says

    Fuck this bitch. “I’m not homophobic. Some of my best friends are gay.” Journalism is about knowing what the fuck you’re reporting, not throwing shit out onto the airwaves as fact that harms real live people and then saying “Oops, I made a mistake.”

  42. GregV says

    “are we really so insecure as to refuse to engage in civil discussion, and engage and debunk what this cohen guy was saying?”

    daftpunkydavid: Any number of people (including me or any number of commenters here, not to mention experts in the field or a journalist who had done some homework) could EASILY have debunked what Cohen was saying. The problem was that no one at CNN did. They called him an “expert” and allowed him to say a series of provably false statements with no challenge.
    Now, I understand that Kyra can’t be expected to be an expert on every issue she discusses. But that is no reason not to have anyone knowledgeable there when a crackpot is being allowed his soapbox.

    A glaring example:
    Cohen said that Dr. Robert Spitzer published a study in 2002 “showing 200 men and women who reversed from homosexual to heterosexual and they changed their orientation.”

    Kyra let that statement stand and then changed the subject to whether there was opposition to changing the law.
    The correct response that a learned journalist (or expert guest panelist) SHOULD have countered with would have been something like: “No, Spitzer’s study certainly did NOT find 200 people who changed orientations. He studied 200 people, all hand-picked by ex-gay groups as their star students, but almost all of those 200 did not even CLAIM to have ceased same-sex attraction, let alone had done so in any provable way.

    “Here’s a transcipt of that study. The claim you’ve repeatedly made in public is simply not there, and the author has asked groups like yours to stop misrepresenting it. Surely you’re aware of this, Mr. Cohen. So what on earth would motivate you to keep making these false claims?”

  43. BRAIN says

    What next…discussing converting all minority groups to straight and white..because CNN sees a problem!

    Kyra you made a mistake…admit it…and stop digging a deeper hole for that USELESS network you work for……

    …and where is dick rider…Anderson?

  44. g_whiz says

    While…I appreciate her apology (in a manner of speaking) I can’t help but think anyone thats an ally of both progressive thought and gay issues wouldn’t have even for a moment suggested the deposed counselor she had on was credible. I’d refer her to Rachel Maddow, who dealt with the widly discredited Richard Cohen in a more “apropriate” way.

  45. Bryan Harrison says

    Providing an uncontested forum to a sensational, uncredentialed bigot whose work is based on discredited studies that have been rejected by every reputable organization in the field…

    That’s what “journalism is all about”?

    No dear, that’s what The National Enquirer is all about.

  46. Randy says

    Apparently in Kyra-land, journalism means you put one side on TV, and then the other side has to dig through the rest of your previous reporting — ever — to imagine what their message would be like if it was on TV too. How many guesses whether the other side would have even been presented at all, if people hadn’t made a stink about it?

  47. Jon says

    It is so sad that there are so many in my community and on this blog who are willing to censor any type of discussion where there are those that disagree with us. Don’t get me wrong–I don’t think my homosexuality is in need of a cure and I view all advocates of such opinion as an extremist in our culture. Nevertheless, ex-gays exist in our society, and it is a thought-provoking discussion, and I can see why the average viewer would be intrigued to hear a little about the topic. And, I think, once they view it, they would agree that Dr. Cohen and the ex gays are on the fringe and don’t deserve more than a mere mention.

    Those who disagree with me argue that a “gay cure” discussion is as ridiculous as one concerning the veracity of the Holocaust? But that discussion is a non-starter because there are Holocaust survivers amongst us who witnessed it. And the same can be said for the ex-gay population (although they are statistically small), who earnestly claim they have been converted, so it is newsworthy to interview them some. [This website, after all, does not seem to mind dedicating significant media space to microscopic ideological groups, like the Phelps family’s tiny Westboro Baptist Church.]

    I wonder, Towleroad and GLAAD, why you were too eager for us to lynch Kyra and CNN? Are we that afraid of our opponents that we have to destroy our allies who are willing to hear what the opponents have to say–no matter how radical? Please!!! Grow up! We and the viewers can think for ourselves and we will not “convert” to heterosexuality just because Dr. Cohen plugs his website three times on an obscure segment of CNN programming.

    Also, Towleroad, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO about addressing the GROSS MISOGYNY on this website?!?! I cannot tell you how offensive it is to read the C- word and B- word every time your news stories concerns a homophobic (or not, in the case of Ms. Phillips) female public figure. Since there are so many posters on here who advocate censoring hate, maybe we should do some housekeeping of our own?

  48. daftpunkydavid says

    gregv… i won’t bemoan you for not reading the other comments i made about this story, but if you did, you’ll see that we don’t disagree.

  49. says

    “It is so sad that there are so many in my community and on this blog who are willing to censor any type of discussion where there are those that disagree with us.”

    It’s not about censorship. I have no problem with CNN interviewing guests with whom I disagree. I’m a secure gay man who lives in a state where I’m fully equal. I don’t give a hoot personally what Mr. Ex-Gay has to say. The problem is a matter of journalistic ethics, and that is worth our energy.

    What many of us all calling Kyra Phillips and CNN on is this tendency to invite on as “experts” people who are nothing of the sort and then not questioning their false statements or lack of professional standing. In this one side vs. the other side school of journalism, everyone is an equal expert and all opinions are equally valid. They are not. If you’re going to interview somebody who is making dubious factual claims, you challenge those claims. That’s journalism.

    So we alerted CNN to their unprofessional journalistic standards. Probably some people alerted them more rationally than others. C’est la vie. But, hopefully, CNN will think about their standards next time and do a more credible job. If they do, then our message has been heard. If it hasn’t been heard, we’ll make it again. No one is “lynching” Kyra.

  50. Mark says

    Craig, thanks for posting that link to the Jon Stewart clip. Kyra, did you watch that?

  51. Clem says

    CNN pulls stunts like this that prove they are more interested in sensational stories than sound reporting, and then they wonder why their ratings keep dropping like a rock.

  52. patrick nyc says

    If Phillips had half a brain, or was more concerned about the facts and not ratings, she would have known that Rachel Maddow blew that idiot Cohen out of the water recently. I surf the net, you would think if she did not have the time, her staff would. All she had to do was google. There are dozens of pages on this freak, Maddows would have come up.

    Phillips is not all that is wrong with CNN, they just hired the right wing nut Eric Erickson, who makes Palin and Beck seem sane.

  53. Scott Alger says

    I watched both news clips and have to ask WTF is the problem with it? It was just a stupid newscast.

    I have looked to Towleroad for new several times a day but now I wonder if it is just out to create tea party, fox news type of sensationalism.

    With the sensationalized hatred spewed out by Towleroad about this news clip and the people commenting it is no wonder the world hates us fags. Commenters ask for the facts but they only accept the facts when it fits their agenda.

    Progress is not going to be made by people reacting to hateful remarks with hateful remarks. Apparently many readers of this blog are no different than the hateful conservative, tea baggers that they despise.

  54. walter says

    this bitch would never said he was the wrong choice if she and cnn hadn’t gotten all the nasty emails. here’s another example of someone who thinks they can say anything they like, but when confronted they feel hurt and wounded. sorry but too bad that she didn’t like the attacks on her journalist talents but she deserved it. sounds like the catholic churc say whatever they want and when challenged, they become the victims

  55. Vince S. says

    Most of the comments on here are so self-absorbed and tacky. No wonder the progress is slower than it could be.

  56. John says

    She gave homophobia an international audience and she is the victim… I grieve for her ignorance. I am glad she read my mail though!

  57. TANK says

    Shut your fat, cowardly kapo trap, scott alger. Just shut the fuck up. Would that it were possible, you and your kind would receice rights last.

  58. Todd E says

    @ JVogel – Kyra Phillips and her incompetent research crew either were asleep at the wheel or indulged in a tasteless grab for ratings. You might it think it a trivial matter. I think she MAY have ruined a life or two.

    She allowed a totally unqualified, un-credentialed pseudo-scientist to present bogus information to a wide audience. When Fred Phelps does it, it gets ratings, but we know he’s crazy. When Cohen does it, his facade of sanity allows him to present his views as if they had a grain of validity or truth.

    Cohen’s seeming-plausibility is dangerous, indeed. If even ONE LGBT teen bought into his views, and decided to have him/herself subjected to “reparative therapy,” a discredited practice that includes electrical shock applied to the genitals, then he’s damaged a life, as recent Proposition 8 testimony in California can attest.

    So, yes, I care “what she or Cohen have to say.” The “poor little homosexual watched his segment and as a result became convinced that his sexuality was bad and that he should (and could) change it – that’s his own damn fault” argument is callous and cynical. We are NOT “all responsible for educating ourselves.” Parents and broadcast media inform our children. “The homosexual in question,” if pre-adolescent, would most likely NOT have “reached this conclusion with or without that broadcast.” In fact, given the fact that GLBT teens attempt suicide at three times the rate of straight ones, and that one in seven attempts succeed, Cohen’s propaganda (and those who spread it or apologize for it) may contribute to kids killing themselves.

    So, yes, I DO give a damn. I DO “care what she or Cohen have to say.” And I won’t join you in your apathy – whether or not you consider that malice, I’m quite sure confronting potentially harmful bigotry masquerading as truth is worth every bit of the energy anyone puts into it.

  59. Brian says

    All Kyra had to do was have Dr. Anderson on to express a viewpoint making her first segment more balanced and everything would have been fine. As a journalist, she let Cohen get away with sending a very bad message…especially if her “heart” is contrary to his…she lost control and blaming the backlash doesn’t hold her in any better light.

  60. aleabeth says


    My mind is just… reeling.

    I have so many thoughts/comments/retorts vying for attention in my head right now that I have no clue where to even start.

    I’m one who wrote to the three ladies at CNN. I did so without attacking individual character instead of behavior. Doing so would have been counterproductive as was proven by the half baked response to them.
    Because guess what most ‘breeders’ heard???

    Folks… who exactly do you think you need to reach besides the ‘lawmakers’? Yes, be concerned over the waffling teen and how they would respond to this… but isn’t your biggest target group to reach… those that not only ‘make’ laws, but those that voted them in in the first place.

    As someone who lives in both worlds (the hetero and the GBLT and has access to individuals on both sides of the fence) the allies that are needed won’t be found in the enemies camp (although spontaneous enlightenment has been known to occur), it’s with those still sitting on the fence.

    Reaching these individuals is paramount, they’re the ones that go to the polling/voting booths as well.

    What the hate mail did, was focus that whole segment on poor poor Kyra, rather than on Dr. Anderson. Notice how she reminds the audience twice, in the beginning and at the end, which IS significant. Dr. Anderson (who still was not assertive enough to counteract Cohen)was most likely lost in all the drama. Has anyone contacted Jon Stewert’s production team about this? His program seems to be VERY popular over regular news conglomerates. Maybe getting him and his program to poke at her ‘reporting’ again might counteract the harm her soundbite may have done, ne?

    Ya know… the biggest mistake this country ever engaged in was to give religion a friggin voice in politics/ government.

  61. JeffNYC says

    That was not an apology. There was not one “I’m sorry” or “I apologize” in it.

    It was an acknowledgment of a mistake–“Richard Cohen was not the most appropriate guest to have on”–but not an apology.

  62. Roger says

    Although I think Kyra’s apology was well-intentioned, she once again misses the point. This was never about her or whether or not she personally is homophobic. This was about her failing to hold herself to minimal journalistic standards by allowing a crackpot like Cohen a platform to espouse his controversial views without challenging them, calling his (lack of) credentials into question, or allowing a licensed professional a voice in countering his batshittery.

    She, as a journalist, treated the subject of “curing” homosexuality as if it were a valid topic for rational debate and discussion. It’s not.

    Whatever is “in her heart” is irrelevant.

  63. FunMe says

    To get “respect” Kyra, you have to earned it.

    The fact is that you insulted us. Next time watch your words and stop INSULTING others.

    Let this be a lesson to you: don’t mess with the gays home gurl!

  64. customartist says

    “unswerving support”??

    I have never used this word in my life. That’s because it is not real. CNN and Kyra Phyllipps have both made a mistake that they have not acknowledged, which is the precursor to correcting same. I consider not the Topic, but the Method, of presentation to be a “vicious” affront to Gay people everywhere.