Published on December 3, 2023, 1:53 am

Chris Wallace has established a reputation as a prominent journalist, always striving to maintain balance in his political commentaries. Although an avowed Democrat, he managed to maintain neutrality in his previous post at Fox News. However, after moving to CNN, Wallace seems to have undergone a transition and emerged resembling more of a left-wing pundit than impartial journalist.

A recent segment featuring discussions on Hunter Biden supplied proof of this transformation. The conversation suggested that the president’s son had outsmarted House Republicans by offering to testify in their impeachment inquiry only if it took place publicly. In line with her viewpoint, fellow commentator Kara Swisher termed this move as ‘brilliant.’ Disagreeing with this stance, Reihan Salam highlighted that deposition first was the method followed by the Democrat January 6 panel.

However posing the question – “Did Hunter Biden outsmart House Republicans?” deviates towards bias. It also raises questions about Wallace’s understanding of the facts or hints at deliberate deceit on his part. He overlooks two significant points – Hunter Biden does not have any say over what kind of deposition he participates willingly in because he has been issued a subpoena specifying a private session by Congress; and being president’s son doesn’t provide immunity from observing the stipulations that come along with such subpoenas.

As one groans under real news fatigue, this significant deviation in journalistic ethos is disconcerting and disappointing at best. This professional deformation is crystal clear when you visualize the converse scenario: Would Wallace be tolerantly batting for one of Donald Trump’s sons?

By crowning Hunter Biden’s empty threat as an exceptional tactical gambit backed up without upper hand power to execute it, Wallace appears to have reduced himself merely into someone championing for those they favor rather than providing trusted news rooted in objective truth.

Maintaining fair and ethical standards while reporting critical information shapes public opinion and reflects deeply on one’s Christian worldview. Is it now deemed acceptable at CNN to overlook this indispensable principle in the pursuit of partisan advocacy? Or is there room for some introspection?

These rhetorical questions are but a call to uphold high professional standards in journalism, an appeal to return to providing trusted real news that objectively informs and shapes perspectives. While presenting breaking news, it’s crucial that reporters, analysts, and correspondents hold fast to patchy integrity when navigating the contemporary scene of politics.