CNN blackmailing Trump wrestling GIF creator?

[zoogs]

Wow, hang on. Some of those outlets do NOT belong in the same category as, specifically, Breitbart and Infowars. Not even Fox and MSNBC are equal analogues. Salon certainly deserves no such reprobation (apart from being of fairly modest quality, at best).

 

But broadly, I agree: there's always been fair criticism of the media and its effects on us. This, though, is the wrong direction.

[Red Five]

I am not sure if this is "blackmail", but the threat is oddly worded. I would have no problem with them publishing his name.

[BigRedBuster]

I stand by my list even though they are to varying degrees of partisanship. When you have outlets that are partisan and cater to one specific side and where someone who is part of that side can consume that media and never hear or read anything that is open minded to the other side of the argument, then this is where we end up.

[Red Five]

Also, this sounds like a case for TrollTrace.com

[zoogs]

I stand by my list even though they are to varying degrees of partisanship. When you have outlets that are partisan and cater to one specific side and where someone who is part of that side can consume that media and never hear or read anything that is open minded to the other side of the argument, then this is where we end up.

The problem with Breitbart is not that they are partisan.

 

We benefit from quality analysis from both left and right-leaning (even to strong degrees) editorial voices.

[knapplc]

 

[zoogs]

That's fascinating.

[Danny Bateman]

No question, but is CNN actively tracking down all threats and creators of inappropriate gifs, contacting them and threatening to out them for their decisions? I don't believe they are.

 

That said, I'm guessing they wanted to make an example of someone and shame the president, particularly since they've come under a lot of fire from him recently. I can understand their motivation.

 

After some thought and reflection on the outrage their decision generated, this is where I come down on this.

 

That feeling is only furthered by Knapp's list of Trump trolls heading up the effort to get this trending. They're just plugging another quarter in the outrage machine, which they'll do at every available opportunity, in order to make their hero an unfairly persecuted victim.

 

I saw the thread on reddit where people went nuts about this. Lots of people defended CNN's legal ability to publish his name or pointed out that he can't expect anonymity. But nobody made the inverse argument...

 

If we just let this environment fester, hatred and vitriol for the media will continue to soar. What happens when someone snaps and a media member winds up hurt or worse? Are we just going to absolve Trump for fomenting and cultivating that type of mood in America right now? Is he guiltless? Does anyone really expect him to take responsibility for that if it happens?

 

I see CNN's response as an attempt to put a chill on that type of anger stoking from POTUS.

[Enhance]

I see CNN's response as an attempt to put a chill on that type of anger stoking from POTUS.

Precisely.

 

It's actually a good lesson, particularly in regards to purported internet "anonymity." Most people have no idea how traceable they are online. I had a friend in high school who learned how to do a lot of those reverse tracing techniques quite successfully, and that was 13 years ago from a teenage kid with a free summer and internet access.

 

Interestingly enough, social media has also made us feel immune to blowback. Look at how many people post hateful/terrible things, and even threaten others, using their full names on various social media platforms. It's incredible.

[HuskermanMike]

What I am curious about is why does this Han Solo reddit guy not file some lawsuit against CNN. They went out and found him and tried to blackmail him as an anonymous user. His lawyers would make it a private thing where he doesn't show up or something to that effect- so his true identity is not revealed. Saying that they can release his name at any given time is controlling his freedom of speech. He was obviously trolling on an internet forum for memes and the like, why don't they let the mods at reddit handle it? They are trying to control a random poster who was making some meme for fun, and CNN has to make a big deal out of it is mind boggling.

 

 

It would be like some twitter user that gets offended by Husker board twitter account and tries to threaten to release all the mods and admins real identities to the world. A waste of time and blackmailing someones time they spend on a message board.

 

I do not stand for any of his racist posts or the like, but his Trump video was just a funny internet meme to be left at that.

[BigRedBuster]

 

I stand by my list even though they are to varying degrees of partisanship. When you have outlets that are partisan and cater to one specific side and where someone who is part of that side can consume that media and never hear or read anything that is open minded to the other side of the argument, then this is where we end up.

The problem with Breitbart is not that they are partisan.

 

We benefit from quality analysis from both left and right-leaning (even to strong degrees) editorial voices.

 

That's the problem though. These sites start of as just "editorial" sites. Then, they start putting themselves out there as "news" sites breaking the latest alarming facts nobody else will tell you. There is no accountability.

 

Even Fox News early on was a decently respectable network. But, when they get the following they got and realized the more outlandish you can report on how horrible and evil the left is and how it got their audience in a lather and foaming at the mouth so they tune in more and more and they convince all of them that all those other news outlets are in the pockets of those evil liberals........it turns into a disgusting mess.

 

There are a lot of media outlets on both sides that are like this.

[BigRedBuster]

This guy is a real piece of work.

 

[Enhance]

What I am curious about is why does this Han Solo reddit guy not file some lawsuit against CNN.

That's the thing about narrative, though - assuming CNN's account of the situation is true, they did not reach out to this man to perform a bit of blackmail.

 

CNN investigated, found the supposed creator and reached out to him. Sure, we don't know their real motivations, but all we know is they wanted to talk. That user (after discovering someone knew their identity) reacted by pulling down the content, apologizing to Reddit and calling CNN himself. CNN said the user was afraid of having his identity revealed and they may have struck an agreement. Some might view that as blackmail, but if the user requested his name be left anonymous for his own protection so long as he met certain requirements, that's ultimately an editorial decision. I'm unaware of any legal standing that would defend him from from having his name publicized.

 

As far as I know, there is no such thing as "private citizen" protection granted to people who post under anonymous usernames on online message boards.

 

The issues here are more about ethical questions/concerns than legal ones, imo.

[BigRedBuster]

I'm really not sure how CNN is being slung in the mud for this.

 

This troll put this GIF out to the public behind an anonymous face on the internet. It promotes violence towards the media. The whole thing blows up. CNN then does an investigation to try to figure out who used THEIR LOGO in something like this. They then make the decision to not publish his name.

 

CNN basically showed they can track down people who do this. It will prevent some from doing it again (especially this guy).

 

I'm failing to see how CNN is the bad guy in this.

[zoogs]

I think the problems with Fox are far less severe than with Breitbart. I don't think Breitbart's problems grew out of partisanship so much as they grew out of someone recognizing the power of media and how to wield it.

 

Not all partisan outlets have the same mission statement. Unfortunately, for this discussion it's no longer fair to say 'both sides'. Rush Limbaugh, conservative radio, Breitbart, Infowars, etc...this is a conservative machine that grew out of some needs and desires. Perhaps had the shoe been on the other foot, but it wasn't. Of course, how might things change now, I don't know...and it's legitimately worrying.

 

Now, are there media outlets on both sides that are low quality, but that's a bit of a different topic, isn't it? I guess I don't understand Salon and MSNBC being on this list. Very, very different kinds of flaws; it's not a matter of 'degree'. Fox, too, is different in kind but its problems have been well-documented.