Russia this, Russia that, CNN laughing all the way to the bank.

[barbos]

This is ironically indicative of the problem of the CNN. People want to hear what they want to hear and don't want to hear what they don't want to hear. So CNN talks only about things which increase their ratings, even when they know what they say is not true.

OR they talk about things that ARE true, but they only talk about those true things that boost their ratings.

And then fire these 3 reporters for no reason whatsoever?
Even if what you say were true it would still be biased journalism, because they would be ignoring things which are true but went against their popular narrative.

 

[Keith&Co.]

OR they talk about things that ARE true, but they only talk about those true things that boost their ratings.

And then fire these 3 reporters for no reason whatsoever?

But were they fired for violating the network's policy, or for obeying the network policy but getting caught? Neither one would be 'for no reason whatsoever,' but this one incident is NOT proof of the network's policy.

Even if what you say were true it would still be biased journalism, because they would be ignoring things which are true but went against their popular narrative.

Is anyone saying that if it's true, it's not biased journalism?
But your claim that they know the stories are untrue is what needs some sort of support, or at least corroboration beyond one guy's opinion and the support of a known liar.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Give us the entire tape or step off, O'Keefe.

I'd like to see that be a matter of law. You publish an excerpt of a recording and you must either make the whole recording available (trivial these days with the web) or explain to a judge why parts of it must be kept secret.

 

[ZiprHead]

This is so sweet. A biased "journalist" trying to find bias in journalism.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

OR they talk about things that ARE true, but they only talk about those true things that boost their ratings.

And then fire these 3 reporters for no reason whatsoever?
Even if what you say were true it would still be biased journalism, because they would be ignoring things which are true but went against their popular narrative.

For embarrassing the company. You don't actually have to be in the wrong in such cases.

 

[LordKiran]

And then fire these 3 reporters for no reason whatsoever?
Even if what you say were true it would still be biased journalism, because they would be ignoring things which are true but went against their popular narrative.

For embarrassing the company. You don't actually have to be in the wrong in such cases.

Cnn will not fire people for merely embaressing the company. Take this producer for example.

CNN did not fire him because that'd make it look even worse. What CNN can do though is bar this producer from moving any further up until he decides to leave of his own accord.

 

[Will Wiley]

It all shows the sad state of American journalism. A buffoon like Trump tells CNN and other that they put out "fake news" and before long Trump is proved right. There have been other examples lately too. These appalling media outlets get warned and then they go out put out fake news anyway.

The NYT had to recently retract their repeating of Hillary Clintons bare faced lie about 17 intelligence agencies too.

The strange thing is Hillary Clinton lied when the truth would have done. She could have just told the actual truth, and it would have been just as powerful.

Trump is a lot more cunning.

There stupid/corrupt journalists keep embarrassing America in front of the entire world.
America could have the best media in the world but not at the moment

NYT retracts claim that ‘17 US intelligence agencies’ verified Russian DNC email hack

 

[Copernicus]

People love to bash the press, but bad journalism has happened in the past. CNN did the right thing by retracting its story precisely because it is interested in publishing the truth. It has taken action to make sure that journalistic standards are upheld more strenuously in the future, especially regarding the Russia scandal. Moreover, there is enough bona fide reporting on that developing scandal that a single tainted story should not be seen as invalidating everything that the press has reported so far. It is such sensational news that there are bound to be reporters out there who are going to cut corners to get their byline on a story. That is just part of human nature. Some journalists have more integrity than others.

Republican propagandist O'Keefe, who put out the video in the OP, has been caught before fabricating stories, and he has never once retracted them. Instead, he has defended his disinformation videos as legitimate in court. So it is a little weird to see people bashing CNN here for doing the right thing and (at least a few) giving O'Keefe a pass because of lack of evidence. His videos do not "speak for themselves". His past speaks for itself. So this video has no credibility at all.

 

[Will Wiley]

Poll: Voters grow weary of Russia probes

A majority of voters believe the Russia investigations are damaging to the country and are eager to see Congress shift its focus to healthcare, terrorism, national security, the economy and jobs.

Those are the findings of the latest Harvard-Harris Poll survey, provided exclusively to The Hill, which paints a complicated picture of voters’ opinions about the numerous probes that have engulfed the White House.

Sixty-four percent of voters said the investigations into President Trump and Russia are hurting the country. Fifty-six percent of voters said it’s time for Congress and the media to move on to other issues, compared to 44 percent who said the focus should stay on Russia.

But other surveys have found strong support for the special counsel investigating the Russia probe. A Harvard-Harris survey released last month found 75 percent support for former FBI Director Robert Mueller’s investigation.

There is evidence in the Harvard-Harris survey that voters are taking the investigations seriously: Fifty-eight percent say they’re concerned by allegations of obstruction of justice against Trump, with the same number worried about possible dealings between Trump and the Russian government.

But far more — 73 percent — say they’re concerned that the Russia probes have caused Congress to lose focus on the issues important to them. That figure encompasses 81 percent of Republicans, 74 percent of independents and 68 percent of Demo

crats.

 

[Will Wiley]

People love to bash the press, but bad journalism has happened in the past. CNN did the right thing by retracting its story precisely because it is interested in publishing the truth. .

CNN faced $100M lawsuit over botched Russia story

I kinda doubt that was really it. How funny to see a 'sources said' story about CNN. Shoe on the other foot.

Three journalists going seems to indicate more than just "interest in the truth". It seems like an interest in money

 

[braces_for_impact]

People love to bash the press, but bad journalism has happened in the past. CNN did the right thing by retracting its story precisely because it is interested in publishing the truth. It has taken action to make sure that journalistic standards are upheld more strenuously in the future, especially regarding the Russia scandal. Moreover, there is enough bona fide reporting on that developing scandal that a single tainted story should not be seen as invalidating everything that the press has reported so far. It is such sensational news that there are bound to be reporters out there who are going to cut corners to get their byline on a story. That is just part of human nature. Some journalists have more integrity than others.

Republican propagandist O'Keefe, who put out the video in the OP, has been caught before fabricating stories, and he has never once retracted them. Instead, he has defended his disinformation videos as legitimate in court. So it is a little weird to see people bashing CNN here for doing the right thing and (at least a few) giving O'Keefe a pass because of lack of evidence. His videos do not "speak for themselves". His past speaks for itself. So this video has no credibility at all.

I think this is right on target. In fact, I would say that Trump has made journalism (written journalism at least) better. The Washington Post and NYT especially have gotten better.

ETA: The bottom line is that CNN retracted the story because it didn't go through the regular checks and balances that it should have been subject to. It explained where the inaccuracies lied, and terminated three reporters, some saying that was too harsh. Enemies of the people don't do this. Also, I notice Trump is big on shouting this story to the skies, but this hasn't stopped him from constantly pushing Fox news stories, even though they retracted their Seth Rich conspiracy story, did not explain exactly what was wrong with the story, and took no corrective action.

 

[Elixir]

"Scaramucci tweeted that “CNN did the right thing. Classy move. Apology accepted. Everyone makes mistakes. Moving on.”

They saidd it was a violation of their editorial standards. At least they HAVE editorial standards, unlike Faux News, Breitbart, National Enquirer and the rest of Cheato's propaganda mouthpieces.

 

[scombrid]

Already heard about this from a news media prospective. This producer works on medical related stories, not political. He has no insider knowledge of what is going on at CNN as far as the Trump/Russia narrative goes because he's not an insider. His opinion is no better than any man on the street or anonymous poster on a message board.

There are dozens and dozens of producers that work for CNN, the same with all other major news networks. News producers are the guys or gals sitting inside the news truck directing the shots to the cameraman and helping the reporter/interviewer maintain their thoughts on the subject. They are nothing special.

O'Keefe is again being dishonest by not explaining this guy has no personal knowledge about CNN/Trump/Russia. He thinks he found a "gotcha" for the gullible to hang onto and obviously caught a couple gullibles here.

This. In this situation, it's like asking a customer service manager if it's his company's business to actively defraud customers. He may actually think so, but that doesn't mean he understands what the board of directors is doing. O'Keefe is famous for his selective and dishonest editing of video in every case he's ever been involved in, and he has a criminal history of trespass and using false pretenses to gain access. Not in the interests of uncovering the truth, but in the interests in giving his side of the argument ammunition - ammunition that turns out to be blanks except to those that continuously take what he does for fact without question due to their own confirmation bias. Now you may count yourselves among them. Every single time this guy does this it turns out to be bullshit. I feel pretty confident calling this bullshit as well unless I'm provided with much more solid counter-evidence to the contrary. I'm not required to examine each and every argument Kent Hovind pulls out of his ass to prove evolution wrong after twenty years of his arguments turning out to be blullshit. Maybe Kent Hovind will one day get lucky and happen upon an argument that utterly destroys evolution and win that Nobel Science Prize. Until then, I'm pretty safe in saying that Kent Hovind is a huckster that fleeces the gullible that wish to hear what they want to hear. So is O'Keefe.

He used to do this with anti-abortion videos. Funny I have never seen the current supporters in this thread using O'Keefe's arguments in defense of "Life" before, but suddenly they wish to heed his words with regards to Trump. Perhaps they should all go reevaluate their opinions on abortion and voting fraud also.

So what are we left with? A CNN employee that thinks there's nothing good coming out of the Trump bullshit (he's not exactly precise in what that means) and thinks Trump and voters are incredibly stupid. I call that truth in advertising, about a person who's opinion no one really cares about, and carries no weight.

Yep and Yep.

This producer has an opinion but he has about as much valid insider knowledge as your average "chemtrail whistleblower". The conspiracy theory promoters pass off the whistleblower as some sort of high ranking official when they were really just a technician of some sort.

 

[braces_for_impact]

"Scaramucci tweeted that “CNN did the right thing. Classy move. Apology accepted. Everyone makes mistakes. Moving on.”

They saidd it was a violation of their editorial standards. At least they HAVE editorial standards, unlike Faux News, Breitbart, National Enquirer and the rest of Cheato's propaganda mouthpieces.

Yep, and most importantly, the President himself. Currently, the media is being held to a MUCH higher standard than our own President.

 

[Keith&Co.]

It all shows the sad state of American journalism. A buffoon like Trump tells CNN and other that they put out "fake news" and before long Trump is proved right.

First off, how would that work? By name-calling and childish bitching, you affect the business you're bitching about? How?

Is it like the villains in children's after-school programs? The ones that get teased and decide, 'well, if they're going to accuse me of being a thief, i'll steal something!'
You know that people don't really react that way, right?

And more to the point, i still doubt that Trump has been 'proved right.' Trump has never bothered to offer any evidence for any of his whining.

More like, Trump says, and some people believe exactly because Trump says, and some people believe because they find Trump's bullshit useful for one or another reason.

But neither of those is actually proving that CNN's policy is to promote fake news, that everything the publish is fake.

 

[barbos]

Scaramucci is a graduate of Goldman Sucks so he can go and fuck himself as far as I am concerned, even if he was not investigated.

 

[laughing dog]

"Scaramucci tweeted that “CNN did the right thing. Classy move. Apology accepted. Everyone makes mistakes. Moving on.”

They saidd it was a violation of their editorial standards. At least they HAVE editorial standards, unlike Faux News, Breitbart, National Enquirer and the rest of Cheato's propaganda mouthpieces.

Yep, and most importantly, the President himself. Currently, the media is being held to a MUCH higher standard than our own President.

I think our media should be held to a higher standard. Presidents come and go, the media does not.

 

[repoman]

So, I watched Van Jones explanation clip from Anderson Cooper. It made sense and if he was substantially wrong about saying that the context being that Trump-Russia collusion is a nothingburger for the progressive hope of an impeachment and removal in the near future then Project Veritas would show the whole unedited tape unlike the chickenshit liars they are.

Give us the continuous footage and audio, chickenshit O'Keefe. If he had it and the context remained damning of CNN and Van Jones he would release it.

 

[barbos]

Russia is a democrat's Benghazi.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Russia is a democrat's Benghazi.

First off, Benghazi has been investigated to death. Nothing was found. We've barely scratched the surface of the Russian investigation. There was no Benghazi cover up. Most dems cooperated fully with the investigators. The republicans have done everything they can to cover up the Russian investigation! They've fired investigators; denied access; threatened investigators, and etc. If there is nothing to the Russian investigation, why the cover up?