Venezuela's government shuts down CNN

a reply to: introvert

They didn't try to influence an election. They didn't try to rig a debate.

that at the least is debatable if not an outright falehood
it was CNN's town hall event exclusively


Donna Brazile and Roland Martin[edit]
In October 2016, WikiLeaks published emails from John Podesta which showed CNN contributor Donna Brazile passing the questions for a CNN-sponsored debate to the Clinton campaign.[20] In the email, Brazile discussed her concern of Clinton's ability to field a question regarding the death penalty. The following day Clinton would receive the question about the death penalty, verbatim from an audience member at the CNN-hosted Town Hall event.[21] According to a CNNMoney investigation, the debate moderator Roland Martin of TV One "did not deny sharing information with Brazile."[22] CNN severed ties with Brazile on October 14, 2016.[23][24]

a reply to: ROBOTNINJADRAGON

"We're the biggest ones promoting her campaign"

Lol I can't believe you guys can actually try to defend a media outlet that openly admitted to helping one candidate over another.

a reply to: rockintitz

The question is entirely subjective. If you're more liberal than Fox, you're going to think it has a conservative bias. If you're more conservative than CNN, you're going to think it has a liberal bias. Most allegations of bias do not relate to lying or mis-reporting facts;

In other words, most allegations of bias are bias.

I'm coming from the subjective end, saying, actually CNN isn't that bad. They are bias sometimes. This distinction makes me better than people that call the entire organization 'fake news', especially if they subscribe to similar medium outlets of information. I use Google for my news. It's rare I ever even read material from the same outlet, but that's me personally.

a reply to: ROBOTNINJADRAGON

In other words, most allegations of bias are bias. 

You clearly didn't watch the clip. I didn't allege anything. I let CNN do it for me.

originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: ROBOTNINJADRAGON

In other words, most allegations of bias are bias. 

You clearly didn't watch the clip. I didn't allege anything. I let CNN do it for me.

To prove what? They're bias sometimes? I did watch the clip. Did you read my first two posts to you? Did you read the initial post you quoted?

At what point did we claim they WEREN'T bias? In otherwords, you're backing off now saying you said nothing, and WE are the ones claiming CNN is bias? Be it 'sometimes'?

Do you understand your position? What are you saying here that we haven't already said?

He literally said [CNN is sometimes bias] congratulations on countering that argument showing CNN is bias, in a single clip. Definitely goes AGAINST what he said right?

How can you call such a reasonable perspective delusional? Wouldn't delusion have been CNN 'hiding' they support Clinton? Wouldn't delusion be saying CNN isn't 'ever' bias? Are you serious? You're delusional!

I heard that CNN has cia working inside. Wots all that about then?

a reply to: ROBOTNINJADRAGON

What? I was responding to the claim that CNN was middle of the road. It isn't.

Then you said allegations of bias are biased. Which I found funny because it wasn't me alleging bias, it was CNN.

Comprendo?

originally posted by: introvert


They are fairly middle of the road, with some bias mixed in from time to time. Some Left, some Right.

Can you give a single example of right wing bias on CNN?

originally posted by: introvert
Sounds like what Trump and many of his supporters want to do. Suppress the freedom of the press and free speech of those that do not push favorable content.

Your name says it all man. You need to get out more and talk to people. Alot of us are tired of finding out the truth later. It's false news. It's not real. It's fake. It's not the truth.

Don't do it to yourself.

every media company is responsible for what they write,say and report. It is their responsibility to ensure the accuracy and truthfulness of everything that they report. if they can`t be sure of the accuracy and truthfulness of something then they shouldn`t report it, that`s the way it was, that`s what real journalism is about.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: introvert


No. CNN had nothing to do with it. Brazile tried to give Hillary a step-up in the debate, which doesn't matter a bit because each side always declares their candidate the winner and it does not have an effect on the election.

so it's OK to give one side the upper hand as long as it's YOUR side. Got it. (Since the debates have no effect on elections)

I did not say that. I did not support Hillary or the Democrats.

What I tried to do is make a clear distinction between rigging the election and giving Hillary debate questions.

Which I will say again, CNN did not do.

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: rockintitz

That was a generalized comment about the media in general. It is not proof that CNN has been promoting her campaign, in the context in which you mean.

So CNN admits that CNN was promoting hillary's campaign, and you don't believe it?

Was that fake news?

That is not what he said. He said the media in general, not CNN itself.

Context is key.

a reply to: shooterbrody

that at the least is debatable if not an outright falehood it was CNN's town hall event exclusively

What did CNN do, or ask someone to do, that could be considered rigging?

Is Brazile not to blame, or can you prove CNN asked her to do it?

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: introvert


They are fairly middle of the road, with some bias mixed in from time to time. Some Left, some Right.

Can you give a single example of right wing bias on CNN?

Hiring Corey Lewandowski to be a contributor.

He's Trump's former campaign manager that was under and agreement not to say bad things about Trump.

Why would CNN hire him if he can't be honest?

originally posted by: galaga

originally posted by: introvert
Sounds like what Trump and many of his supporters want to do. Suppress the freedom of the press and free speech of those that do not push favorable content.

Your name says it all man. You need to get out more and talk to people. Alot of us are tired of finding out the truth later. It's false news. It's not real. It's fake. It's not the truth.

Don't do it to yourself.

It's not fake.

Calling it fake news is for the lazy.

What I don't get is, how can you have fake news?

If you're blinding accepting opinions and pictures / video, then is it really fake news or is it that you're incredibly gullible?

I wouldn't believe even my own teachers 100% why would you?

Why give ANYONE 100% of your trust when they haven't earned it?

Protect your brain people, it's pretty valuable, do you're own research, this isn't a game of telephone, it's reality, people are lame and will lie, so RESEARCH!

a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined

What I don't get is, how can you have fake news?

What I don't get is after YEARS of calling FOX NEWS.

FAUX NEWS.

The people that call FOX FAUX NEWS lose it over those two little words they have had no problems throwing around for years.

Means the same thing.

Hospital CEO Wins Major Court Victory After Accusing CNN of False Reporting

submit to reddit Those who accuse CNN and other mainstream media outlets of “fake news” will probably revel in a recent decision by a federal judge in Atlanta, Georgia. While Judge Orinda Evans didn’t all out declare that CNN was peddling in falsehoods, she did take aim at the network in an initial judgment in favor of a former hospital CEO who sued CNN accusing them of purposely skewing statistics to reflect poorly on a West Palm Beach hospital. Judge Evans didn’t mince words in her 18-page order allowing the case to move forward, and dismissing CNN’s attempt to get it thrown out of court.
...
Mr. Carbone contends that CNN “intentionally” manipulated statistics to bolster their report. He also claims that CNN purposely ignored information that would look favorable to the hospital in order to sensationalize the story.

“In our case, we contended that CNN essentially made up its own standard in order to conduct an ‘apples to oranges’ comparison to support its false assertion that St. Mary’s mortality rate was 3 times higher than the national average. Accordingly, the case against CNN certainly fits the description of media-created ‘Fake News.'” said Carbone’s attorney L. Lin Wood, in a statement to LawNewz.com.
...
On Wednesday, Federal District Judge Orinda Evans ruled that the case could move forward, even ruling that she found that CNN may have acted with “actual malice” with the report — a standard necessary to prove a defamation claim.

“The Court finds these allegations sufficient to establish that CNN was acting recklessly with regard to the accuracy of its report, i.e., with ‘actual malice,” the order reads. CNN had tried to get the case dismissed.

originally posted by: introvert


Why would CNN hire him if he can't be honest?

This is seriously your example? What about the TV show hosts/anchors/reporters?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: galaga

originally posted by: introvert
Sounds like what Trump and many of his supporters want to do. Suppress the freedom of the press and free speech of those that do not push favorable content.

Your name says it all man. You need to get out more and talk to people. Alot of us are tired of finding out the truth later. It's false news. It's not real. It's fake. It's not the truth.

Don't do it to yourself.

It's not fake.

Calling it fake news is for the lazy.

I also called it "false" "not real" "not the truth".

Go back and read it again. You lazy reader.