CNN has hissy fit over Trump gif, bullies 15 year old kid

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

Just now, Snake said:

It is the threat of future disclosure that is so concerning and dangerous. News is not supposed to be a weapon to be brandished to induce good conduct by organizations like CNN. Free speech and free press go hand in hand. Indeed, many reporters are protected more under the former right than the latter in legal controversies. Once a news organization becomes the manager of free speech, it becomes a menace to the free press.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.

zactly

[Snake]

2 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

zactly

It doesn't surprise me he doesn't get it, it just bugs me he his so adamant in his wrongness.

[Rod]

[Zambroski]

6 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

 

[Wildboer]

26 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Corporations are not and will not ever be people in my book. I don't care what the law says. 

And that is some seriously flawed thinking equating the KKK and some kid (or adult as it does not matter). One is hate speech. One is freedom of expression. Again, you do not have a right for anonymity. That is not the arguement here. It is the precedent of a NEWS organization attempting to coerce a citizen of this country via force. It goes against all things they should stand for. EVERY ONE OF THEM. Think about their desire to keep their own sources anonymous. You are a liberal minded guy. I cannot believe you cannot see the ethical peril here? 

And this has nothing to do with regulating the media. It has everything to do with expecting more from them. If they fail to do so, it is apologists for those media orgs that are propagating this unethical behavior. People should boycott them. That is your regulation. But apologists who look at this through party lenses will prevent good order and decorum from ruling our media. It is disgusting. 

The media reporting their name isn't CNN coercing them by force, it's CNN telling the public who said what and the public coercing them by force. You're shooting the messenger.

26 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

I think it's time for some accountability.  This saying whatever they want about whoever or whatever they want with no proof and questionable "sources" while standing behind the first amendment has been overplayed.  Most Americans not only no longer trust the MSM, the despise them.

In fact doing anything that offends or puts out anybody else while standing on some basic idea turned fringe idea of a "Constitutional right" has been overplayed.  

 

You're arguing for and against the same thing at the same time.

 

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

8 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

The media reporting their name isn't CNN coercing them by force, it's CNN telling the public who said what and the public coercing them by force. You're shooting the messenger.

 

 

Your critical thinking needs some work here. For starters, CNN said they would post his or her name if they did not retract and apologize. That is coercion. Yes, the public plays a part because CNN has the agency to make the public care. They hold a significant amount of power. They are wielding that by tracking down someone who pulled their pants down. Yes, it was a childish gif, but CNN deemed it enough of an insult to go after someone for that. That is power being abused. That is using your agency that should be used to defend expression and speech. Snake's quote was dead on. You know it is really showing how authoritarian some will get on the left to protect their own. This is bullshit, and I think you know it. 

 

[Snake]

 

There is also something untoward about the fact that CNN — the subject of the original video — was the news outlet that uncovered his identity. That fact creates the appearance of vengeance: If you, even as a random and anonymous internet user, post content critical of CNN, then it will use its vast corporate resources to investigate you, uncover your identity, and threaten to expose you if you ever do so again.

The reality here is likely more complicated. The most offensive passage here — “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change” — sounds like classic lawyer language that executives or corporate lawyers would demand be included. It does not sound like something a typical journalist would write on their own. (CNN did not respond to The Intercept’s inquiries about who inserted this language or what future behavior on the part of the user might trigger CNN’s threat to expose him; we will update this article if any response is received.)

And CNN’s role in discovering this user’s identity is likely more a byproduct of Kaczynski’s well-established internet-sleuthing skills than a corporate decision to target a critic. Indeed, the decision to withhold the person’s name — had it been made without the threat to expose it in the future — could arguably be heralded as a commendable case of journalistic restraint.

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/05/cnn-anonymous-critic-trump-wrestling-gif-reddit-user/

[SSFB]

CNN's actions here are pretty fucked up and their defense of it is just coming off as pathetic. 

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

2 minutes ago, Snake said:

 

There is also something untoward about the fact that CNN — the subject of the original video — was the news outlet that uncovered his identity. That fact creates the appearance of vengeance: If you, even as a random and anonymous internet user, post content critical of CNN, then it will use its vast corporate resources to investigate you, uncover your identity, and threaten to expose you if you ever do so again.

The reality here is likely more complicated. The most offensive passage here — “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change” — sounds like classic lawyer language that executives or corporate lawyers would demand be included. It does not sound like something a typical journalist would write on their own. (CNN did not respond to The Intercept’s inquiries about who inserted this language or what future behavior on the part of the user might trigger CNN’s threat to expose him; we will update this article if any response is received.)

And CNN’s role in discovering this user’s identity is likely more a byproduct of Kaczynski’s well-established internet-sleuthing skills than a corporate decision to target a critic. Indeed, the decision to withhold the person’s name — had it been made without the threat to expose it in the future — could arguably be heralded as a commendable case of journalistic restraint.

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/05/cnn-anonymous-critic-trump-wrestling-gif-reddit-user/

Even at that, just saying we know who it is, is self serving. It is nothing more than a look at me, look how magnanimous we are even though we spent time looking for the person and investigated. They had every intention of leaking his or her name if they did not bend the knee and kiss the ring. Fucking disgusting. Journalistic restraint? That would be not even looking. Any journalist worth a damn wouldn't even have had the consideration of looking for that person. 

[Woodtick]

5 hours ago, Momorider said:

So now the Story is that CNN doxed the wrong guy the meme dates back to January done by a Mexican guy   CNN literally is 100% FAKENEWS

[ICEMAN!]

28 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Your critical thinking needs some work here. For starters, CNN said they would post his or her name if they did not retract and apologize. That is coercion. Yes, the public plays a part because CNN has the agency to make the public care. They hold a significant amount of power. They are wielding that by tracking down someone who pulled their pants down. Yes, it was a childish gif, but CNN deemed it enough of an insult to go after someone for that. That is power being abused. That is using your agency that should be used to defend expression and speech. Snake's quote was dead on. You know it is really showing how authoritarian some will get on the left to protect their own. This is bullshit, and I think you know it. 

 

Says who?

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

7 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

Says who?

Um, CNN... 

"CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change." 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

If he did not retract and apologize they would have. Fucking A, come on. The whole "apology" thing is most likely handwritten by CNN. Don't be stupid. 

Edited July 6, 2017 by xtralettucetomatoe580

[Wildboer]

1 hour ago, Snake said:

It doesn't surprise me he doesn't get it, it just bugs me he his so adamant in his wrongness.

You should know better than to think I'm genuinely making an argument that corporations are people right now.

38 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Your critical thinking needs some work here. For starters, CNN said they would post his or her name if they did not retract and apologize. That is coercion. Yes, the public plays a part because CNN has the agency to make the public care. They hold a significant amount of power. They are wielding that by tracking down someone who pulled their pants down. Yes, it was a childish gif, but CNN deemed it enough of an insult to go after someone for that. That is power being abused. That is using your agency that should be used to defend expression and speech. Snake's quote was dead on. You know it is really showing how authoritarian some will get on the left to protect their own. This is bullshit, and I think you know it. 

 

They never said that. 

So how do we rectify this situation and prevent further abuse?

[Sal Rosenberg]

5 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Um, CNN... 

"CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change." 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

If he did not retract and apologize they would have. Fucking A, come on. The whole "apology" thing is most likely handwritten by CNN. Don't be stupid. 

 

Ooops

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

2 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

 

They never said that. 

So how do we rectify this situation and prevent further abuse?

Yes, yes they did. They said in very clear words that they would publish his name if he didn't continue to play ball. So are you somehow making a logical jump that if he didn't play ball in the first place, they would not have published then? Come on. 

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

You cant prevent abuse btw. It would go against freedom of the press. Only the citizens can stop that through the action of boycotting them. 

[oleroule]

on one hand, cnn bitches about freedom of speech getting shut down because the white house press briefings do not meet their standards.

on the other hand, they shut down freedom of speech because they are offended by a silly (but funny) gif.

i love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

Edited July 6, 2017 by oleroule

[ICEMAN!]

1 minute ago, oleroule said:

on one hand, cnn bitches about freedom of speech getting shut down because the white house press briefing do meet their standards.

on the other hand, they shut down freedom of speech because they are offended by a silly (but funny) gif.

i love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

That's the smell of burnt toast from the stroke you just had oldrool

 

[oleroule]

Just now, ICEMAN! said:

That's the smell of burnt toast from the stroke you just had oldrool

 

i bet you know a lot about stroking

[ICEMAN!]

12 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Um, CNN... 

"CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change." 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

If he did not retract and apologize they would have. Fucking A, come on. The whole "apology" thing is most likely handwritten by CNN. Don't be stupid. 

No, CNN did not threaten the man.  They attempted to make contact, he deleted his account and posted an apology prior to the reporter talking to him.  This is more Seth Rich fake news spin BS.  Stop falling for this crap.

 

[Zambroski]

 

1 hour ago, Wildboer said:

You're arguing for and against the same thing at the same time.

 

No, I am not.  I think the issue you are having here is coming to some self/side awareness over the left's hypocritical idea of freedom of speech.  Or rather, their distorted idea of it.  This was wrong.  It was blatantly wrong.  Period.  And it was over something stupid.

10 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

You should know better than to think I'm genuinely making an argument that corporations are people right now.

They never said that. 

So how do we rectify this situation and prevent further abuse?

Prevent it further?  Well, right now, other networks are hopefully learning from  CNN's terrible decisions.  Kind of a teaching "don't ever do this" moment for journalists.

 

[Rod]

3 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

That's the smell of burnt toast from the stroke you just had oldrool

 

 

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

1 minute ago, ICEMAN! said:

No, CNN did not threaten the man.  They attempted to make contact, he deleted his account and posted an apology prior to the reporter talking to him.  This is more Seth Rich fake news spin BS.  Stop falling for this crap.

 

"CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change." 

Critical thinking level = Crayon eater

Edited July 6, 2017 by xtralettucetomatoe580

[ICEMAN!]

5 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Yes, yes they did. They said in very clear words that they would publish his name if he didn't continue to play ball. So are you somehow making a logical jump that if he didn't play ball in the first place, they would not have published then? Come on. 

They should have just published his name.  It's news, and he put his thoughts and opinions in a public forums. He has no right to anonymity and even bragged about Trump's retweet.  What's the problem?

[Rod]

Just now, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

"CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change." 

You know you're talking to ice right... he still believes in the Russia thing