The very best journalists are typically incredible writers with a distinct flow. The very best editors adapt to that flow and enhance the writing, not disjoint it. This is when a company’s editorial voice can come in and screw everything up — like CNN did in September.
To make matters worse, the other side of the political aisle is using the flub to manipulate their audience.
“Democrats want to offer health care to undocumented migrants. Here’s what that means:” was a headline published by the outlet on September 11, 2019.
The piece, written by Tami Luhby, frames the political stance of the 2020 Democratic candidates — all ten of whom famously raised their hands at the Democratic primary debate when co-moderator Savannah Guthrie asked, “Raise your hand if your government plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants.”
President Donald Trump called it “an end to that race.” Spoiler alert: he lost that year.
The CNN piece also broke down how, in 2019, the undocumented — or “illegal alien” for those who prefer to use the actual legal term — could already access health care for free via state or federal funding (thanks to your tax dollars).
But if you just read the headline, all you’re going to get out of it is: Democrats want to give illegal aliens free health care. Not realizing they were already getting free health care in 2019.
Fast forward six years. On September 30, 2025, the very same CNN writer, Tami Luhby, published a piece titled, “Fact check: Trump falsely claims Democrats want to give free health care to ‘illegal aliens’ in government shutdown battle.” Now, if you’re on the right — or extreme right — you can screenshot these two headlines and have an argument. However, it’s an argument out of context (or, as I like to call it, noise for the political gabber).
The 2025 piece outlines what Democrats would like to keep funding: “federal subsidies to help Americans afford Obamacare policies and to reverse deep cuts to Medicaid and other health coverage contained in Trump’s sweeping domestic policy agenda package.” Luhby added, “But neither of those changes would provide health coverage to undocumented immigrants, since they aren’t eligible for either program.”
This last line is mostly true, with the exception of illegal aliens who came over on a boat from Cuba or Haiti, who are provided Medicaid under the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB). It is, more importantly, in Luhby’s report. She even ends the piece by saying, “But the ‘big, beautiful bill’ provision is not directly tied to coverage for undocumented immigrants.”
How does this all tie into CNN’s editorial voice screwing up two well-written and informative pieces about the events happening at the time each was written? The answer is twofold.
One, they are trying to distract readers by claiming something is false when it’s only half false. CNN previously outlined how illegal aliens can receive free health care in the aforementioned 2019 report written by Luhby under President Trump’s first term.
More importantly, it shows that context is key. Sure, the right can argue Democrats want to give health care to illegal aliens because that is a fact.
Of the ten Democrats who took part in the 2019 Democratic primary debate (Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Andrew Yang, Pete Buttigieg, Kirsten Gillibrand, Michael Bennet, Marianne Williamson, John Hickenlooper, and Eric Swalwell), four still hold office, and others have recently echoed support for the sentiment.
But the issue in question is not Medicaid or Obamacare. It’s the funding going directly to hospitals to support their “needs.” This is the funding issue neither side has touched upon, because the right wants to sweep under the rug the fact that Republicans have provided and advocated for funding of hospitals (which provide services to illegal aliens) for decades without blinking an eye.
To quote Jesus, “He who is without sin may cast the first stone.”
Sure, federal funds to hospitals might give free health care to illegals, and yeah, Republicans could be trying to stop the cash flow by claiming their policies are “America First.” But in reality, both sides of the media are acting like red and blue ants in a tube that’s been shaken by an outside force.
Editorial cajoling of headlines to appease your “fact-checking” or fact-searching audience is killing good journalism. It can also kill your brand because factual, catchy headlines from years past will now be held against you in the court of public opinion.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.
Krystina Alarcon Carroll contributes features and columns for Barrett Media. She has experience in almost every facet of the industry including: digital and print news; live, streamed, and syndicated TV; documentary and film productions. Her prior employers have included NY1 and Fox News Digital and the Law & Crime Network. You can find Krystina on X (formerly twitter) @KrystinaAlaCarr.
