Topic: Media Research Center
When we last left off, the Media Research Center's Jorge Bonilla was trying to insist that Univision's softball interview of Donald Trump (which he won't admit it was) was a great thing -- but somehow also meaningless because he has to keep up the narrative of Univision being left-wing reprobates. But as the criticism of the softball interview continued to grow, other MRC writers felt the need to weigh in. Jeffrey Lord spent his Nov. 25 column complaining about the critics, with a dash of whataboutism:
The Hispanic network Univision is getting whacked by liberals. Why? Because they had the temerity to sit down for an interview with the former President of the United States who also happens to be the leading-by-a-lot candidate for the 2024 GOP nomination.
That would be, of course, Donald Trump.
[...]
Univision was created to model the left-leaning American broadcast networks. Which are nothing if not leftist propaganda machines. Univision was specifically designed, according to its ex-president, to be a Spanish-language version of those left-wing propaganda networks.
And now? Now the new leadership of Univision chose to arrange an interview with…..Republican former President Donald Trump. Ohhhhhh, the horror.
On top of which Blaya accuses Univision and Trump of spreading -- you guessed it -- propaganda. As if he's never watched an American network slobber over Barack and/or Michelle Obama.
[...]
It is not news to note that Democrats view the Hispanic community not as a diverse, thoughtful community but rather as the political property of progressives. In which contrary thought to the progressive mindset is not allowed. Univision, in that mindset, was built to be on the liberal plantation. And with this Trump interview the network had the audacity to step off of that plantation.
The all-American holiday season is now officially upon us. Serious politics will emerge once past the Christmas rush.
Lord ignored the fact that much of the criticism comes from the softball nature of the interview, not that it was done at all.
Bonilla returned for a Nov. 26 post whining that longtime Univision anchor Jorge Ramos pointed out the softball nature of the interview:
It was a matter of time before Univision senior anchor and Special Editorial Advisor to the CEO Jorge Ramos weighed in on the controversy surrounding Televisa’s interview of former President Donald Trump. And, in a manner similar to his own interactions with Donald Trump, he made it all about himself.
The Trump interview happened nearly three weeks ago, but the Ramos response ran on Ramos’ website during a holiday weekend. Was The New York Times pitched but not interested? Or did Ramos wait for the holiday to drop his column? Weird timing.
The column, titled “The Danger of Not Confronting Trump”, wastes no time in going to the heart of the matter, which is Jorge Ramos.
When Ramos pointed out that he has never interviewed Trump but was limited to asking a couple questions at a 2015 campaign stop in Iowa, Bonilla huffed that it was "a performative confrontation" -- as if Peter Doocy and other right-wing reporters don't do the same in the White House briefing room. Meanwhile, Bonilla still wouldn't admit that the crux of the issue was that it was a softball interview, and he again tried to insist that it means nothing to his designated anti-Univision narrative:
The media’s narrative surrounding the Televisa interview of Trump is not one of a corporate parent trying to restore balance to a property gone horribly wrong that has lost significant trust within its own viewing cohort, but of Univision’s brave struggle for editorial independence. But again, and so we’re crystal clear, by “independence” we mean the independence to remain a repository of Democrat [sic] talking points. Nothing else.
When actor John Leguizamo used a "Daily Show" segment to point out the softball nature of the interview, Bonilla again ignored that salient criticism and clung even harder to his Univision-is-evil narrative in another Nov. 26 post:
Leguizamo, who last made news by race-whining over actor John Franco’s casting as Fidel Castro, saw fit to post a video somewhere and call for a boycott of Univision over its deviation from its normal editorial standards, which is to be a reliable Democrat talking point regurgitator. And now, we suffer this obnoxious rant which aired on the desiccated husk of The Daily Show.
The media ran with Leguizamo’s initial video, oohing and aahing at these calls to counter an editorial shift THAT NEVER HAPPENED. There is no shift at Univision. There may be the perception of a shift, but there is no actual shift. And the fact that the media continue to amplify denunciations of a nonexistent shift means that none of these people that supposedly care so much about Univision ever even watch Univision. In fact, the Venn diagram of people who saw Leguizamo’s dopey rant and watch Univision regularly is two circles, a thousand miles apart. The woke anglos in the studio whooped and hollered, but no one who might actually be affected by an editorial shift at Univision actually saw any of this nonsense.
In the end, this is just a tantrum meant to create the illusion of an editorial shift. Don’t believe the hype of a shift unless Jorge Ramos and President of News Daniel Coronell either tender their resignations or are the subjects of a press release wishing them all the luck in their future endeavors.
Bonilla was still cranking out performative outrage at anyone daring to point out the softball Trump interview. He played whataboutism in a Dec. 4 post:
There’s been a lot of recent Acela Media and Professional Latinx outrage over 2024 presidential candidates doing what they perceive to be softball interviews with Spanish-language media. Case in point, the kerfuffle over former President Donald Trump’s interview with TelevisaUnivision. Not surprisingly, they don’t share the same concern for President Joe Biden’s interview with a radio network owned and operated by the foundation previously overseen by his campaign manager.
[...]
This interview of Joe Biden aired just before Thanksgiving on a radio network owned and operated by the family of his campaign manager, as the left were still in full meltdown mode over the Trump-Univision interview. This whining is not about “disinformation”, but about the left’s perceived loss of monopoly power and control over what Spanish-dominant audiences see and hear as news content.
Note that Bonilla still refuses to admit the Trump interview was softball-laden, conceding only that it was "perceive to be" a softball interview (while ignoring that this perception is correct).
When Univision President of News Daniel Coronell defended the Trump interview, Bonilla hyped it another Dec. 4 post (while, of course, still clinging to the corporate anti-Univision narrative):
Coronell defends both the style and substance of an interview, and explains the history behind the interview. He explains Enrique Acevedo’s approach to the interview, which was to get full answers from Trump. Coronell also addresses the issue of Joe Biden’s ads.
The record reflects, with crystal clarity, that we are no fan of Coronell. Much of Univision’s descent into open partisanship happened under Coronell’s watch, and I don’t think that a one-shot interview with Trump will suddenly undo years of institutional decay. The left are making much ado about nothing.
The whole episode is a reminder that the left only care about having the power to decide what news and information Hispanics see and hear. The perceived loss of control, although having no basis in fact, is what triggered the left's manic outcry over this interview.
We publish Coronell’s remarks here because they are relevant to the controversy, they address critics’ concerns, and are therefore in the public interest. Furthermore, the Acela Media parachuting into this story wouldn’t even know where to begin to look for Coronell’s remarks. You’re welcome.
More than a month after the interview, Bonilla was still at it, this time raging in a Dec. 12 post at a New York Times article on the interview:
The idea that the onetime home of Walter Duranty should be taken seriously on anything pertaining to an editorial shift, or concern over an editorial shift at any other media outlet, is laughable. But, alas, here we are. The Old Grey Lady is the latest to weigh in on the Acela Media’s collective panic over Univision’s interview of former President Donald Trump specifically, and over a perceived editorial shift at Univision generally.
[...]
As with the other pieces, this article conveys the left’s sense of mourning over an ongoing Hispanic shift away from the Democrat Party. Is Univision’s shift real? As I’ve stated before, personnel is policy, and it’s hard to imagine Univision completely shifting to the center with the personnel that are currently in place- chief among them Jorge Ramos.
Univision’s so-called shift may come down to that old Michael Jordan proverb: “Republicans buy sneakers, too”. It turns out that they also buy ads.
Once more, Bonilla absolutely refused to admit the Trump interview was a puff piece and insisted that its existence doesn't change the anti-Univision narrative he's paid to spout.
