Bernie talked about wall street. Sure, things happen you can't foresee. I can give him credit; he's run on a platform of not being like ordinary politicians. But it's not his first time he's seemed tone deaf. This is the one issue that pops up repeatedly. He ignores other issues and pivots back to wall street. It hurts his message. Like how Howard Dean got buried for being excited. Sorry, politics is picky and many politicians perform well at timing.
Bernie as the 10th panelist or whatever on a show that had already substantially talked about the issue responded to a direct question about his campaign by answering about his campaign. This was not an interview specifically with Bernie in primetime, this is the normal Sunday news shows, which air every Sunday, have a ton of guests every Sunday, and which discuss a variety of topics no matter what the top story is. One possibility is that the people reacting negatively are deeply disgusted with 100% of all news coverage ever and spend their lives devoted to righting the wrong of talking about the wrong things at the wrong time, or another possibility is that anger at Bernie is being projected in a "bitch eating the crackers" kind of way.
It's also baffling and bizarre to argue that the Sanders is culpable for not spiking the interview while not criticizing the media for asking the question to begin with. Let us analyze Face the Nation.
Here's the Face the Nation front page:
1. What's next for law enforcement officials in Orlando mass shooting?
2. Highlights from John Dickerson's first year with Face the Nation
3. Gunman kills 50 people at Orlando night club
4. Dickerson on Clinton's historic win, Paul Ryan's challenge
5. Gallery: Women who broke glass ceilings
6. Florida Sen. Bill Nelson reacts to Orlando shooting
7. Paul Ryan calls Donald Trump's judge comments racist
...
...
...
...
32. Sanders: Agenda meeting with Clinton will be this week.
...
49. What can Congress do to address mass shootings?
Is this a terrible injustice against the attention that the tragedy requires? Is Face the Nation culpable of minimizing LBGT violence? How many of the people quoted between #3 and #32 about any number of subjects ought to have torpedoed their interviews? Should Face the Nation just have done a 60 minute tribute to pride? What is the argument being made about how people should appropriately grieve today?
I believe that respect, dignity, and gravity should be given to the attacks, and that a full discussion should be had about them. I do not believe this mandates that politics not only don't choose to talk about other things, but actually need to manipulate or threaten press to cancel all pre-planned or pre-recorded coverage that is not connected to the attacks. That is not consistent with history, and it strikes me as vastly more likely to be a bizarre projection of anti-Bernie affect than a broader principle being applied consistently.
Here's
their coverage of the Paris attacks last november--you see that like the Orlando attack, the Paris attacks are an important issue put center stage (at the time you also see Sanders weighing in and talking about terrorism--and yes, linking it to global economic inequality and climate change, which may be correct or not but is not going on a tangent)... but they also covered college affordability, Biden not entering the race, past Democratic contests, and Benghazi. It's not because they were deeply disrespectful of french people, tone deaf about the suffering in the world.