Getting Organized
First, for those who may not have seen the segment, transcripts from the show can be found on the CNN website:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0701/05/pzn.01.html
I’m told that we need to send letters to Jonathan Klein at CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/anchors_reporters/klein.jonathan.html
I do not see any contact information for Mr. Klein, so we may need to send snail mail to the CNN offices to his attention. Someone “in the industry” has told me that this should be our most important contact. If anyone can find an email address or fax number for him, please let me know.
I’m also told that we should send letters to David Payne and Susan Grant. I have not been able to find contact information for them either, if someone else can find it, please let me know.
http://www.cnn.com/INDEX/about.us/dotcom_executives.html
Update: I’m told that email at CNN is in the form of firstname.lastname@turner.com. If this is the case then the email addresses will be:
David.Payne@turner.com
susan.grant@turner.com
When writing to the executives be clear about how you can no longer trust CNN as your news source. List specific things that were said that are not true. Let them know how you feel, but be polite, please.
This page on CNN is for reporting errors: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form6a.html?2
Please try to cite specific information that was spoken in error and provide a link (if possible) showing the facts.
You can also contact Investor Relations at Time Warner (Parent Company of CNN) by emailing ir@timewarner.com
And finally, if you’d like to educate the individual panelists, here is how to do so:
Roland Martin has a message board on his site. Go to his site at rolandsmartin.com and you’ll see the link for the message board in the lower left hand column.
Cenk Uygur has a blog. With comments.
Solangel Maldonado’s agenda seems to be completely around race and adoption and how international adoption is a bad, bad, thing. So I’m not sure she will listen to anyone’s opinion since she obviously thinks she has the answers, but if you’d like to email her, her address is maldonso@shu.edu
I would encourage you to address the panel from a position of facts instead of emotion. As tempted as we may be to namecall, we will be taken a lot more seriously if we can try to refrain from doing so.
And finally, if anyone happened to notice the sponsors of the show, I’d be interested in hearing the list so we can also flood them with email.
January 6th, 2007 at 10:50 am
Tally Ho!
January 6th, 2007 at 10:53 am
Cingular
Walgreens
Alka Seltzer Plus - Bayer
Microsoft
GNC - Mutltivitamins
Aspirin - Bayer
Australia.com
Alliance to Save Energy
NHL Centre Ice
Bell ExpressVu
Cialis
One a Day Mens (oneaday.com)
American Express
Ambien
January 6th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Sorry, the above were the sponsors in last night’s program.
January 6th, 2007 at 10:55 am
My friend is on-air talent for CNN. Their emails are usually formatted as firstname.lastname@turner.com
Have at it! ;)
January 6th, 2007 at 10:56 am
Girlie - did you write them down last night, or find them somewhere online?
January 6th, 2007 at 10:57 am
I taped the show and just played it back through the commercials.
January 6th, 2007 at 10:58 am
I’m in Canada…sponsors may be different in the States.
January 6th, 2007 at 10:58 am
Americans can adopt from some Arabic countries, so just be careful how you word your letters. Don’t confuse Muslim with Arabic. Islam is a religion, not an ethnicity.
January 6th, 2007 at 11:10 am
I just went to rolandsmartin.com to leave a message on the message board. I am thinking that all negative comments will be filtered out. Don’t get me wrong, I will still try and leave a message. I don’t see one post that is negative towards him. I think I will e-mail him to let him know my position and to hopefully educate this poor guy on this subject as it is obvious he has not done his homework. In a nice way of course.
R.Q. I hope you are proud of your little kingdom that you have built. I know I am in awe of the amount of people who sent e-mails and going outside thier comfort zone (I for one am one of those people, I recognize that this may be easier than for others) and rally the troops to let our voices be heard.
January 6th, 2007 at 11:14 am
I just read the transcript, printed it so I can highlight issues I want to address in my email to CNN. I can’t believe they can consider this NEWS. Paula Zahn’s panel???? She might as well have dragged 3 strangers off the street. They don’t know the first thing about adoption—IA or domestic. Errrr! Can’t wait to send off an informative, non-emotional letter. I must calm down first! Adoptions from Iraq? Duh.
MJD
January 6th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Since I didn’t watch the program, I cannot comment. But now many of you know why my family gave up on CNN for our source of news several years ago…..
January 6th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Hey folks,
I have treid to find the emails for everyone to no avail.. However, I did manage to get the snail mail address! Yep, I live in ATL.. :-)
It is as follows:
One CNN Center
Box 105366
City Atlanta
Country United States
Postal/Zip Code GA 33048-5366
Telephone +1 404 827 1700 / 1785 / 6888 / 525 4866
Telefax +1 404 525 4056
Email cnn.feedback@cnn.com
q&a@cnn.com
CNN.Reply@turner.com
I hope that this will help a bit..
Claire
LID 10/10/10 ( next?)
January 6th, 2007 at 11:32 am
I read Professor Maldonado’s paper, and I will say that she’s done a lot of research on the subject (unlike the other two panelists, who seemed to have no idea what they were talking about). She makes some good arguments but draws problematic conclusions (especially when she gets to her legal recommendation, which is a non-starter anyway). She also doesn’t seem aware of the ethnocentrism inherent in her own position.
Anyone who’s interested in a short version of her take on Chinese adoption can find it here:
http://www.blackprof.com/archives/2006/12/will_americans_continue_to_ado.html
My wife (ZGirl) and I sent the following e-mail to CNN:
We’re greatly distressed by the misinformation, sensationalism, and oversimplification in tonight’s segment on adoption from China. Apart from the opening news report from (which was accurate and informative, if brief), the segment did a great disservice to viewers and to adoptive parents.
International adoption is a complex topic that raises many important social and ethical questions revolving around our conceptions of family, national identity, and race. An informed discussion that addressed these issues would
have been highly useful to viewers. Unfortunately, tonight’s segment did not provide anything resembling such a discussion.
People who chose to adopt from China do so for many reasons. To be sure, racial stereotyping may play an important role in some decisions and a subtle role in others, but many other considerations play important roles as well. These include concerns about the domestic adoption process, which offers a choice between a highly unpredictable free market of private adoption (in which prospective adopters must essentially solicit birth mothers for a child to
adopt) and a foster care system that faces structural problems. Moreover, many would-be adoptive parents understandably fear the prospect of losing custody of
a child to a biological parent (many states allow a grace period in which birth mothers may change their mind; while this may be a good policy, it’s not easy on the adoptive parents). As for international adoption from other countries, no other nation offers a system that is as reliable, well-run, and corruption-free as the Chinese system (which is controlled by a central government agency, the CCAA).
Lastly, many people who chose to adopt from China—and other countries—share a belief that all children, regardless of nationality, deserve a loving home.
We hope that when you address this issue in the future, you will do better research and include panelists who know more about the subject matter than did tonight’s guests. Perhaps you could even include the voices of adoption professionals, adoption organizations, adoptive parents, and adoptees
themselves.
One other note: as we’re sure many others have pointed out, BMI calculations do not involve anything more than a simple height-weight calculation (contrary to what one of the panelists said).
January 6th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Paula has successfully taken my mind off the excruciating wait for some moments anyway. No one’s been able to do that for me in awhile. So, hey, thanks, Paula! And you, too, funny-man, Mr. Martin! Arrgggghh.
January 6th, 2007 at 11:42 am
somehow CNN keeps bouncing my emails. anyone having that issue as well?
January 6th, 2007 at 11:53 am
I realized last night after the show was over that I’d missed it. Thanks for posting the link to the trascript. Wow, that was really bad. I have already emailed the show and actually posted a copy of my letter on my blog. I agree that CNN really failed the accuracy test here. Amazing.
January 6th, 2007 at 11:59 am
do these _____ not realize this stuff can be seen in China perhaps? this was nothing but racial slurring and stereotyping…. i am so completely offended. and we wonder why our family/friends come up to us with ridiculous comments and “knowledge” based on idiot performances on CNN…. people will listen to that and assume it is all truth! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! screaming is not even enough right now…. i want to jerk them around for basically making jokes and light of the subject the entire time…. paula zahn needs to be reprimanded for allowing such ignornant people on the show for one thing, and then have her journalism license yanked! someone please stop the madness!!!!!!!!!!!
January 6th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
cgb - I did not say Arabic country. I said Muslim country, meaning a country with rules based or founded on the religion of Islam.
If there is such a country that allows adoption by Americans, please let me know.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
CNN is almost as bad as Fox News. Both are a waste of bandwith.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
I posted this on APC as well… but let’s put the blame for such viewing on the higher ups at CNN; Paula Zahn doesn’t sit there and call and book her own guests. This is how tv is done:
As a former broadcaster, I know exactly how this works. A producer or a show ‘booker’ will reach out to any living, breathing body that they can get their hands on to discuss the topic at hand. Now, you always start out with good intentions, trying to locate subject matter experts in whatever related field up for discussion. However, sometimes they’re not available, and more often than not, the producers do not have a varied rolodex of sources. They’ll hop online and see what they glean from reading an article or two, and voila, without doing much research (as tv is an immediate medium), they have their panel of instant crap. Check the box. Unfortunately, this is more of the rule now and not the exception.
As I said… I’m a FORMER broadcaster for such reasons.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Hey RQ-
I told the folks on my agency forum about your info about letter writing. Maybe it will start something. I also told the APC group since they are as irked as we are. Hopefully, you have started a great advocacy for our children. I did tell the APC group that if they write to the execs, do so politely.. I will write a letter tomorrow after I have decompressed a little bit. I think I am still too angry to compose a well thought out polite letter to anyone right now. Thanks for the info to get us started. It continually brings home to me how compassionate and competely organized person you are.
Claire ( next??)
LID 10/10/05
BTW: I got my shirt and bib in the mail!! I love them!
January 6th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
I posted an update into this piece:
I’m told that email at CNN is in the form of firstname.lastname@turner.com. If this is the case then the email addresses will be:
* jonathan.klein@turner.com
* david.payne@turner.com
* susan.grant@turner.com
January 6th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
… i also just got Paula Zahn’s email..
Paula.Zahn2@turner.com
They’re so sneaky.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:23 pm
roland martin is actually answering people directly…i’ve read a response on one of my yahoo groups.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Wow - what was the tone of the response?
It would not be appropriate to quote it, of course. I’m just trying to get a sense of what kind of response he gave.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
I’ve now read the transcript three times, and what I can’t figure out is who this panel is supposed to represent. I understand there was a woman who represents adoptive parents and suggested it is illegal for American agencies to discriminate on the basis of weight, etc. But the other 3 panelists–were they part of an ongoing panel of experts on racial issues in America?
If so, I’m even more appalled because that means CNN set up this whole discussion as part of a larger topic on racial issues, as opposed to covering the new restrictions as a story in and of itself. Please tell me if I’m making sense here before I compose my letter. I just want to make sure I have the facts straight as to who these so-called experts are.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
he’s basically saying that people missed “the point”, that they (the panel) were responding to the professor who’s studied the issue. he repeatedly says they were trying to criticize people (aparents) who hold (subtle or otherwise) racist preferences…that if that’s not you, then it wasn’t aimed at you.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
I have put my response on my blog. I have also emailed CNN and will now begin emailing the rest of the list. Grrrr….
January 6th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
Wow, not at all like he sounded last night.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Is anyone concerned about China’s reaction to this broadcast? It is so derogatory towards China’s orphans that I would love to disassociate myself from it. I don’t support this kind of “trashy journalism” and am happy to continue writing all kinds of emails to CNN and its advertisers, but how do we communicate to China our sorrow and embarrassment over the actions of other Americans?
January 6th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
eli- absolutely! maldonato’s bent is more than clear:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=794705
which rq and others have noted.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
katydid–I agree. I can only hope they will lump these misinformed, out of touch “experts” with all the other journalists who do a poor job of getting all the facts straight. I don’t mean to imply that all journalists are misinformed, only that the CCAA has surely dealt with poor accuracy and misinterpretation, and thus will (hopefully) realize these folks weren’t representing adoptive parents or adoption agencies.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
I recall slinky saying that Americans weren’t looking very good lately because of the way that newspapers were distorting the new guidelines/rules/whatever they are.
I don’t think this helps. {Said while slamming head on table}
Argggh. Just one more thing that I can’t control. Usually I just don’t watch the news. Oops, my bad.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
katydid-
I am concerned as well about our overall image in China’s eyes. I also wonder what the backlash may be. It is our honor to adopt from their country—-an honor they can quickly take away.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Thanks for link, sam.
I’m not sure whether to laugh or fume at this point.
To suggest that the law should dictate that we adoptive parents prove our reasons to adopt are not racially biased is the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard. We are already asked to prove ourselves as capable parents by disclosing our most personal information to complete strangers (which I was happy to do and think is most certainly understandable and necessary). However, I am simply stunned by the suggestion that there are “experts” out there who would have us defend our motivation and our preference for China (or any other country). While I would be happy to outline my reasons for choosing China as I do nearly every time I tell yet another friend or acquaintance about our decision, I’m just laughing at this notion that we would have to prove these reasons weren’t racially motivated. It’s just so unfortunate that this was considered “news” and that we were given no opportunity to defend ourselves. There are a lot of questions I’ve prepared myself to answer on our journey to adopt, but this one was never on my radar.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Solangel Maldonado is a Professor of Law at Seton Hall University. While I am certain that the law school respects her academic freedom to research and draw conclusions as she wishes, they might not agree with her participation in such a panel or some of the comments that she made.
The Dean of Seton Hall Law School is Patrick Hobbs. His email address is hobbspat@shu.edu. He might be interested to know that Prof. Maldonado is making statements such as the one below on national television.
When Paula Zahn asked the panelists what biases potential adoptive parents hold towards Hispanic children, here was Prof. Maldonado reponse:
“MALDONADO: Well the idea about Hispanic kids, it’s sort of mixed. I think the stereotypes about Hispanic kids are both positive and negative. They believe that Hispanic kids are likely to work harder than black kids, but they also believe that they’re not going to be as intelligent as Asian kids.”
I would be very interested to know of the scholarship or studies which support this assertion?
January 6th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
I did not see the show, only read the transcript, but this is what passes for news in the U.S.? What is informative about it? It’s crap. How sad that as Americans we have to watch foreign channels like the BBC to get REAL news. This is not newsworthy….it’s a waste of air time.
January 6th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
I’m taking a little different approach here. I sent emails to Paula Zahn (through CNN, so it’ll probably never get there), Roland Martin, and Solangel Maldonado I first of all expressed my disappointment at the comments on the show. Then… I invited them to spend a week at our house after we get back from China next month with our second daughter. I told them if they are really serious about understanding what Chinese adoptive families are really like, then they’ll come “embed” themselves with us for a week to see how it all really works — and that adoptive parenting is like any other kind of parenting, plenty of hard work and struggle and lots of love.
My guess is that, like most people who make ridiculously uninformed statements about people, they actually have had zero contact with any of those people. I really hope that one of them takes me up on the offer and stays with us. A little real life would hopefully set the record straight. And the thought of making one of those panel members change Penny’s diapers for a week makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
If I get any takers on this, I’ll post back here as well as at our family blog, http://www.bargersvilleberts.com. (You need a password for this; email me if interested.)
January 6th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
First time poster, long time lurker.
I have repeatedly tried to email Jonathan Klein and David Payne regarding this debacle, but the emails keep bouncing. I’m using jonathan.klein@turner.com and david.payne@turner.com. Is there something wrong with these addresses or is there another address out there somewhere?
January 6th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Mine to jonathan.klein@turner.com got bounced back too, and the one to David.Payne@turner.com returned with a message saying:
” I am currently in the office, but CNN.com is observing a NO EMAIL Friday. Please call me at xx . Thanks”
(I removed the phone number from the real email)
January 6th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Apparently David Payne’s address is case sensitive, because when I used the caps, it went through and I got the same auto-reply. However, Jonathan Klein’s still bounces even with caps.
Thanks!
January 6th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
I was very appalled reading the transcript from the CNN show. What a perfect example of why people should think before they open their mouths. What went from criticizing China for their new policies (which they have every right to set their own policies) to questioning the reasons for adopting from China as opposed to adopting from somewhere else was absolutely repulsive (ie. ethnicity and intelligence). I have emailed Paula Zahn letting her know (in the nicest way possible) that her and her panelists owe the American adoptive families an apology.
January 6th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
Sometimes hitting in the pocketbook is the only wayto get their attention…I will be sending e-mails to the sponsors, as well, indicating that I will avoid their products in the future. Harsh, some might say–but this DOES make things happen, and sometimes extremely quickly!!!
If you can contact sponsors, please do. It really does get attention.
January 6th, 2007 at 10:47 pm
I wrote Roland Martin last night, and here is his response to my email:
Wow, you clearly missed the point.
We responded to the analysis of a professor who has actually studied and analyzed the issue. We were criticizing the folks who hold such positions who adopt kids from China.
If that’s not you, then it wasn’t meant for you. When Oprah criticized inner city kids for focusing on materialism, was she talking about all? No!
This issue, like hers, is a mindset some have. Again, if that wasn’t yours, fine. But to deny that thinking means to ignore reality.
Roland S. Martin
http://www.rolandsmartin.com
Sent from Treo 650
He is so completely clueless that I almost feel sorry for him. I do not quite know where to begin. I’ll have to put some time into my response to this. Let’s let him know exactly WHO missed the mark!
January 6th, 2007 at 11:31 pm
According to the “professor”, all AA infants do get adopted fairly quickly, just not as quickly as white infants (some of the parents are from other countries like Canada).
I am not sure why it is the business of Roland or the “professor” why people chose to adopt from China or chose not to adopt an AA child. I don’t see how it would help any child to be adopted by anyone who was less than enthusiastic about the race of that child. If someone does have a racial preference in adoption, so be it. Attempting to strong arm them into adopting an AA child might make Ronald and his new friend feel better but any AA child involved in such an adoption would have been better off in Canada (I am not sure what the “professor” has against Canada).
I think the popularity of China has much more to do with gender preference than racial preference so I am not sure why the talking heads feel the need to bring race into it.
January 7th, 2007 at 11:21 am
You can email Roland Martin directly at this email address:
rmartin@chicagodefender.com
January 7th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Pre-apologies if somebody already posted this - I found the CNN video clip of the segment posted on:
http://www.theyoungturks.com/
Cenk Uygur was one of the fellows on the panel.
(Look for “Click here to watch the third panel discussion on Chinese adoption.” Down a bit, in the left-hand column.)
January 7th, 2007 at 11:32 pm
Interesting that Roland Martin’s responses were exactly the same to all he responded to…….How many of us are going to watch tomorrow night to see what happens on the Paula Zahn show? I can’t decide yet!!!