It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

CNN trusts the Wiki emails enough to fire Brazile but not enough to report on the others?!?

page: 1
16

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   
So it's definitely a case of hypocrisy at it's finest and do as we say (or report) not as we do.

I believe no matter how this thing shakes out, America's trust in the MSM will be greatly shaken. They MSM say they are "looking out" for us and reporting all of the things that are important in our lives, yet they're cherry-picking of what to report on based on their political leaning, and the spin they put on what they actually do report on is beyond pathetic.

And that goes for all of the MSM outlets - no matter which side of the aisle they skew towards.

A pox on all their houses!!!

I actually think they will suffer from the same thing that brought down the print news industry in light of recent events. And if they haven't already, people will find alternative means of getting their information. The emperor has been shown to be butt naked to a much larger audience.

Which leads me to my final question: What sources do you use for accurate reporting and news?

ETA - MOD Note: I'm thinking this thread is better served in 2016 elections forum but will leave it to you folks.

edit on 11/5/2016 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

I thought she resigned from CNN after the emails came out, not fired.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Riffrafter

I thought she resigned from CNN after the emails came out, not fired.


That was the initial "official" report. It has since been learned she was canned but allowed to resign.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Riffrafter

I thought she resigned from CNN after the emails came out, not fired.


www.washingtontimes.com...




CNN announced Monday that it had severed ties with acting Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Donna Brazile in the wake of leaked emails showing that she shared questions for CNN-sponsored candidate events with friends on Hillary Clinton’s campaign.


It could be interpreted several ways. It sounds like CNN initiated the 'severing of ties' which could mean they fired her or gave her the option to quit or be fired. Hard to say really considering the carefully worded announcement.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter


Which leads me to my final question: What sources do you use for accurate reporting and news?


There's the problem. In their haste to turn away from "the lamestream media" people are turning to whatever blog tells them what they want to hear. Bias and spin? The answer to bias and spin isn't to seek out greater bias and spin and in most cases, outright lies.

When a CNN or Fox News or a WSJ or NY Times reports something that is inaccurate, we can call them out on it because they are establishments. They have a name, they have a reputation, they can be sued in court and if they print libel, they'll lose — in other words, they have accountability.

Turning to people who aren't journalists, who are in most cases clickbait hack propagandists, and expecting that you'll get good "information" is like going to a crack dealer for antibiotices because you believe pharmacies are a scam and expecting to get unadulterated pharmaceuticals.
edit on 2016-11-5 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Riffrafter

I thought she resigned from CNN after the emails came out, not fired.


www.washingtontimes.com...




CNN announced Monday that it had severed ties with acting Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Donna Brazile in the wake of leaked emails showing that she shared questions for CNN-sponsored candidate events with friends on Hillary Clinton’s campaign.


It could be interpreted several ways. It sounds like CNN initiated the 'severing of ties' which could mean they fired her or gave her the option to quit or be fired. Hard to say really considering the carefully worded announcement.


And announcements of this nature are always carefully worded aren't they?

Thanks for posting the link to the story.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Riffrafter


Which leads me to my final question: What sources do you use for accurate reporting and news?


There's the problem. In their haste to turn away from "the lamestream media" people are turning to whatever blog tells them what they want to hear. Bias and spin? The answer to bias and spin isn't to seek out greater bias and spin and in most cases, outright lies.

When a CNN or Fox News or a WSJ or NY Times reports something that is inaccurate, we can call them out on it because they are establishments. They have a name, they have a reputation, they can be sued in court and if they print libel, they'll lose — in other words, they have accountability.

Turning to people who aren't journalists, who are in most cases clickbait hack propagandists, and expecting that you'll get good "information" is like going to a crack dealer for antibiotices because you believe pharmacies are a scam and expecting to get unadulterated pharmaceuticals.


Agreed 100%.

So what's the answer? Holding them accountable is the first step but in the meantime, where should folks go for accurate news and reporting? I have some sources I trust. I'm hoping others do too and will share them.

BTW - I loved your last paragraph!




posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Riffrafter




Turning to people who aren't journalists, who are in most cases clickbait hack propagandists, and expecting that you'll get good "information" is like going to a crack dealer for antibiotices because you believe pharmacies are a scam and expecting to get unadulterated pharmaceuticals.


Unfortunately, the election has shown exactly that to be equally as true for established journalists... if you can't see that you are more daft than I thought.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: flice

What post is that quote from?


edit on 11/5/2016 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
CNN would never publicly state they fired a black woman.

That woukd be racist.

They probably just gave her a little extra " go away money" to say she resigned.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

If theres any good to be extracted from this election, its the exposure of the unreliability and downright corruption and thus invalidation of TV news of any kind.

At least an increased awakening of even the dull masses to this truth.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 12:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: Riffrafter

If theres any good to be extracted from this election, its the exposure of the unreliability and downright corruption and thus invalidation of TV news of any kind.

At least an increased awakening of even the dull masses to this truth.


Amen to that.

The American people and more importantly the American voter is no longer disengaged and uninformed.

They have become keenly aware, engaged and are consuming information as fast as they can get it.

Which is why I fear for where they are getting their news and information.

I really hate the MSM. They could have played such a great role in this for us. Instead we're left with this crap.

to the increased awakening.

to all flavors of the MSM.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 12:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Riffrafter


Which leads me to my final question: What sources do you use for accurate reporting and news?


There's the problem. In their haste to turn away from "the lamestream media" people are turning to whatever blog tells them what they want to hear. Bias and spin? The answer to bias and spin isn't to seek out greater bias and spin and in most cases, outright lies.

When a CNN or Fox News or a WSJ or NY Times reports something that is inaccurate, we can call them out on it because they are establishments. They have a name, they have a reputation, they can be sued in court and if they print libel, they'll lose — in other words, they have accountability.

Turning to people who aren't journalists, who are in most cases clickbait hack propagandists, and expecting that you'll get good "information" is like going to a crack dealer for antibiotices because you believe pharmacies are a scam and expecting to get unadulterated pharmaceuticals.


Exactly. The reason the MSM isn't covering most of the leaked emails is because, in most cases, those emails do not make the case for the allegations claimed by these fake news sites.



new topics

top topics



 
16

log in

join