Russia Russia Russia... MSM crazy train of lies.

[revelarts]

CNN Journalists Resign: Latest Example of Media Recklessness on the Russia Threat


Glenn Greenwald
June 27 2017, 9:03 a.m.

THREE PROMINENT CNN journalists resigned Monday night after the network was forced to retract and apologize for a story linking Trump ally Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund under congressional investigation. That article — like so much Russia reporting from the U.S. media — was based on a single anonymous source, and now, the network cannot vouch for the accuracy of its central claims.

In announcing the resignation of the three journalists — Thomas Frank, who wrote the story (not the same Thomas Frank who wrote “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”); Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Eric Lichtblau, recently hired away from the New York Times; and Lex Haris, head of a new investigative unit — CNN said that “standard editorial processes were not followed when the article was published.” The resignations follow CNN’s Friday night retraction of the story, in which it apologized to Scaramucci:...

BUT CNN IS hardly alone when it comes to embarrassing retractions regarding Russia. Over and over, major U.S. media outlets have published claims about the Russia Threat that turned out to be completely false — always in the direction of exaggerating the threat and/or inventing incriminating links between Moscow and the Trump circle. In virtually all cases, those stories involved evidence-free assertions from anonymous sources that these media outlets uncritically treated as fact, only for it to be revealed that they were entirely false.

Several of the most humiliating of these episodes have come from the Washington Post. On December 30, the paper published a blockbuster, frightening scoop that immediately and predictably went viral and generated massive traffic. Russian hackers, the paper claimed based on anonymous sources, had hacked into the “U.S. electricity grid” through a Vermont utility...Literally every facet of that story turned out to be false...

Slate published another article that went viral on Trump and Russia, claiming that a secret server had been discovered that the Trump Organization used to communicate with a Russian bank. After that story was hyped by Hillary Clinton herself, multiple news outlets (including The Intercept) debunked it, noting that the story had been shopped around for months but found no takers. Ultimately, the Washington Post made clear how reckless the claims were:..

In the same time period — December 2016 — The Guardian published a story by reporter Ben Jacobs claiming that WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, had “long had a close relationship with the Putin regime.” That claim, along with several others in the story, was fabricated, and The Guardian was forced to append a retraction to the story:...

https://theintercept.com/2017/06/27/...russia-threat/


It's INSANE twilight zone action.
as i mentioned in the other thread... crazy Flat Earthers have better arguments and evidence than the MSM does in their obsessive hyping of the idea of TRUMP=Russia, Russia=US Election Hacking.


It's like the MSM is an Exwife making up a story she thinks makes an admittedly bad husband look worse.
Others that know what's up wonder why she keeps making up all these lies about him cheating with some Hot Asian woman from work, getting money from the Asian woman, Asian woman breaking into the house, Asian woman controlling his actions and words about how he handles things at the house and on the job. Asian woman meeting with the kids behind her back.

It's just Weird.
especially when there are other TRUE things that could be said against the guy that have ZERO to do with the Chinese woman.
But every day the Exwife is rambling on about her to everyone that will listen about that Asian woman.

[jimnyc]

CNN Journalists Resign: Latest Example of Media Recklessness on the Russia Threat


Glenn Greenwald
June 27 2017, 9:03 a.m.

THREE PROMINENT CNN journalists resigned Monday night after the network was forced to retract and apologize for a story linking Trump ally Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund under congressional investigation. That article — like so much Russia reporting from the U.S. media — was based on a single anonymous source, and now, the network cannot vouch for the accuracy of its central claims.

In announcing the resignation of the three journalists — Thomas Frank, who wrote the story (not the same Thomas Frank who wrote “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”); Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Eric Lichtblau, recently hired away from the New York Times; and Lex Haris, head of a new investigative unit — CNN said that “standard editorial processes were not followed when the article was published.” The resignations follow CNN’s Friday night retraction of the story, in which it apologized to Scaramucci:...

BUT CNN IS hardly alone when it comes to embarrassing retractions regarding Russia. Over and over, major U.S. media outlets have published claims about the Russia Threat that turned out to be completely false — always in the direction of exaggerating the threat and/or inventing incriminating links between Moscow and the Trump circle. In virtually all cases, those stories involved evidence-free assertions from anonymous sources that these media outlets uncritically treated as fact, only for it to be revealed that they were entirely false.

Several of the most humiliating of these episodes have come from the Washington Post. On December 30, the paper published a blockbuster, frightening scoop that immediately and predictably went viral and generated massive traffic. Russian hackers, the paper claimed based on anonymous sources, had hacked into the “U.S. electricity grid” through a Vermont utility...Literally every facet of that story turned out to be false...

Slate published another article that went viral on Trump and Russia, claiming that a secret server had been discovered that the Trump Organization used to communicate with a Russian bank. After that story was hyped by Hillary Clinton herself, multiple news outlets (including The Intercept) debunked it, noting that the story had been shopped around for months but found no takers. Ultimately, the Washington Post made clear how reckless the claims were:..

In the same time period — December 2016 — The Guardian published a story by reporter Ben Jacobs claiming that WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, had “long had a close relationship with the Putin regime.” That claim, along with several others in the story, was fabricated, and The Guardian was forced to append a retraction to the story:...

https://theintercept.com/2017/06/27/...russia-threat/


It's INSANE twilight zone action.
as i mentioned in the other thread... crazy Flat Earthers have better arguments and evidence than the MSM does in their obsessive hyping of the idea of TRUMP=Russia, Russia=US Election Hacking.


It's like the MSM is an Exwife making up a story she thinks makes an admittedly bad husband look worse.
Others that know what's up wonder why she keeps making up all these lies about him cheating with some Hot Asian woman from work, getting money from the Asian woman, Asian woman breaking into the house, Asian woman controlling his actions and words about how he handles things at the house and on the job. Asian woman meeting with the kids behind her back.

It's just Weird.
especially when there are other TRUE things that could be said against the guy that have ZERO to do with the Chinese woman.
But every day the Exwife is rambling on about her to everyone that will listen about that Asian woman.

Wait, are you telling me that not EVERYTHING we read in the MSM and on the television is fact and true? And that somehow it's more than CNN, WAPO and the others busted cheating and lying during the presidential election?

One has to wonder, when some in the media go this far, and lie, what else have they lied about? How far have they gone?

The mainstream media. A lot of the TV stations. ALL of our intelligence agencies. The DOJ and the FBI of course.

If I can't trust them, and I don't, then just how far does it go? Who is all involved? WHAT are they doing and for what end goal?

[aboutime]

If you choose to Donate..you can help MELT the flakes.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Wait, are you telling me that not EVERYTHING we read in the MSM and on the television is fact and true? And that somehow it's more than CNN, WAPO and the others busted cheating and lying during the presidential election?

One has to wonder, when some in the media go this far, and lie, what else have they lied about? How far have they gone?

The mainstream media. A lot of the TV stations. ALL of our intelligence agencies. The DOJ and the FBI of course.

If I can't trust them, and I don't, then just how far does it go? Who is all involved? WHAT are they doing and for what end goal?

Such a broad array of characters acting in such a nation destroying way..hmmmm
One could almost suspect some great entity behind it all. One that is worldwide and extremely powerful and one that is always well protected from threats coming their way from any person, group or nation...

................................................ globalists........................................ ......................................... -Tyr

[O E]

Wait, are you telling me that not EVERYTHING we read in the MSM and on the television is fact and true? And that somehow it's more than CNN, WAPO and the others busted cheating and lying during the presidential election?

One has to wonder, when some in the media go this far, and lie, what else have they lied about? How far have they gone?

The mainstream media. A lot of the TV stations. ALL of our intelligence agencies. The DOJ and the FBI of course.

If I can't trust them, and I don't, then just how far does it go? Who is all involved? WHAT are they doing and for what end goal?

Just imagine, the first draft of history is never entirely correct, never was, and never will be. Acting surprised at that revelation is, well, just an admission that the requirements of critical reading hasn't really dawned on someone.

Of course, no one at spurious outlets, such as Breitbart or pjmedia, ever faced consequences for reporting far more frequent falsehoods, or did they?

And then, how about applying some critical reading while perusing the good, given-to-hyperventilating Mr. Greenwald?

And then there is the fact that the vast majority of reporting about Russia, as well as Trump’s alleged ties to the Kremlin, has been based exclusively on evidence-free assertions of anonymous officials, many, if not most, of whom have concealed agendas.

So, how is Mr. Greenwald in a position to know that many, if not most, of these anonymous sources have "concealed agendas"? Oh, and don't tell me the good Mr. Greenwald is in no position to know that with any certainty, and thus his allegation amounts to an "evidence-free assertion".

On the other hand, the good Mr. Greenwald gave a good account about the goings on in today's traditional papers, as they're facing declining readership and ad revenues, and are competing with spurious propaganda outfits, pandering to their particular sectors of the audience, to sell papers. And that's why, as the good Mr. Greenwald admirably explains, they are occasionally prone to hyping threats, because hyped threats sell. Of course, formerly they were hyping the sordid spectacle of one Mr. Trumpy, because that also sold papers, or garnered audiences in TV shows.

The other side of that coin is that traditional papers still uphold some journalistic standards, occasionally dismiss reporters, issue corrections in public, and thus are far too accurate from the point of view of propaganda outfits that would rather have their propaganda remain unchallenged in the public sphere. And that's why we see that all-out assault on the Fourth Estate from a whiny right, from the pampered brat at the top down to the likes of Breitbard and on to, sadly, a once honored journalist like Mr. Greenwald. While he may have a point, he hypes it beyond recognition, and resorts to "reporting" of the kind he decries.

[revelarts]

Just imagine, the first draft of history is never entirely correct, never was, and never will be. Acting surprised at that revelation is, well, just an admission that the requirements of critical reading hasn't really dawned on someone.

Of course, no one at spurious outlets, such as Breitbart or pjmedia, ever faced consequences for reporting far more frequent falsehoods, or did they?

And then, how about applying some critical reading while perusing the good, given-to-hyperventilating Mr. Greenwald?

And then there is the fact that the vast majority of reporting about Russia, as well as Trump’s alleged ties to the Kremlin, has been based exclusively on evidence-free assertions of anonymous officials, many, if not most, of whom have concealed agendas.

So, how is Mr. Greenwald in a position to know that many, if not most, of these anonymous sources have "concealed agendas"? Oh, and don't tell me the good Mr. Greenwald is in no position to know that with any certainty, and thus his allegation amounts to an "evidence-free assertion".

UM OE.
the papers themselves say that much of the bogus info was from "anonymous officials".
That's how he KNOWS.
So what's your problem with Greenwald repeating that?
As far as "concealed agendas" go.
Well If the sources are anonymous, and the info is repeatedly WRONG that they passed on to the papers then BY DEFAULT their agendas for doing so are concealed.
so what's your problem with the statement again? Especially in the light of the SERIES of lies told in the RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA vein.

If it were ONE lie OK, people make mistakes but with this series of Falsehoods over the course of 8-months now, well any objective person should have legit concern about unknown agendas... at various points, gov't and MSM.

And do you really want to compare Grenwald's hyperventilating and the track record concerning factual reporting to that of the MSM?
If you want to play the "disparage and question the source" game