Looks like O'Keefe has another video about to drop. They are hyping it up so it must be kind of bad since everyone knows CNN is in the tank for the Dems and as anti-Trump as possible.

quash said:

---

O'Keefe is a joke. If he told me it was Sunday I'd double-check my calendar.

---

People should have some range of skepticism about all the news sources they read or view. Good for you.

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

quash said:

---

O'Keefe is a joke. If he told me it was Sunday I'd double-check my calendar.

---

People should have some range of skepticism about all the news sources they read or view. Good for you.

---

I get emails from Town Hall and Alternet and try to calibrate somewhere in the middle. I also prefer long form reporting, as it tends to be better supported. I like to see both quotes and analysis.

James O'Keefe defines "fake news."

And he has for years: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/29/project-veritas-how-fake-news-prize-went-to-rightwing-group-beloved-by-trump

Bu of course you support him because Trump does, and you're OK with any lies HE and his supporters tell:

O'Keefe's outing as a duplicitous purveyor of fake news and an incompetent one at that on the same day that Trump proposed his "fake news trophy" was profoundly ironic. All the more so, given the ties between the two men.

On 13 May 2015, a month before Trump launched his presidential campaign, his charitable foundation donated $10,000 to Project Veritas. This week ThinkProgress spotted that the foundation's tax disclosure form for 2015 records a second payment of the same amount to the conservative group.
By then O'Keefe had already acquired a criminal record he was convicted in 2010 of entering federal property under false pretences. He had been attempting to sting the then Democratic senator from Louisiana, Mary Landrieu, but for his pains was rewarded with three years' probation and a $1,500 fine.

The underhand tactics that Project Veritas adopted in its notorious takedown of the progressive network Acorn and that it later applied to media organisations has attracted growing condemnation from unexpected quarters. In 2011 Blaze, the rightwing outlet founded by Glenn Beck, investigated O'Keefe's treatment of National Public Radio and concluded that the editing of a secretly filmed video seemed "designed to intentionally lie or mislead about the material being presented".

But that didn't stop Trump donating $20,000 to the group four years later. Nor did it prevent the then Republican presidential nominee from citing a Project Veritas video at his final debate with Hillary Clinton in October 2016, claiming it proved that Clinton and Barack Obama had hired thugs to cause violence at his campaign rallies.

Jinx 2 said:

---

James O'Keefe defines "fake news."

---

Now post an article about all the investigations he did that were legit and that has exposed corruption, I see those you conveniently ignore.

And thanks for ignoring the actual news about CNN. Exactly what I said would happen.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. Honestly this really isn't anything breaking, everyone already knew this about Zucker and CNN.

Good to see even CNN employees understand this.

riflebear said:

---

It's amazing how liberals are so frightened of FoxNews when they are the most balanced in all their regular news programs but of course their nightly lineup is very conservative and they don't hide it. But they do give both sides in most segments unlike the others.

But, It's another thing for the head of CNN to push Fox is conspiracy theories when they were 100% correct the last 3 years on Russia and many before. Liberals just can't stand negative news about them which is why they have become so corrupt w/out any accountability.

I can't wait to hear the liberals and CNN spin this when they've been cheering on the deep state whistleblowers - lets see how they react now that the shoe is on the other foot and they are being exposed from a 'whistleblower'

---

O'Keefe is no whistleblower. He has proven time and again that he will lie and edit to project a lie. Just interview his witness.

riflebear said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

James O'Keefe defines "fake news."

---

Now post an article about all the investigations he did that were legit and that has exposed corruption, I see those you conveniently ignore.

And thanks for ignoring the actual news about CNN. Exactly what I said would happen.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. Honestly this really isn't anything breaking, everyone already knew this about Zucker and CNN.

---

Not that you care about the truth as long as the lies are told by Trump and his enablers, including O'Keefe, but here's a perspective on why the sort of stuff James O'Keefe does is so harmful--and also why the continual drumbeat of "fake news" eminanting from the most lying president we've ever had, Donald Trump, and his undercutting not only of the media, but of our intelligence and state department staff, is so harmful and destructive to the nation and national security.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/it-is-wrong--and-corrosive--to-conflate-unfavorable-news-and-fake-news/2019/10/11/47966484-ec48-11e9-85c0-85a098e47b37_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1

We are living in challenging times for those who depend on the work of a free press. Every day, journalists across the globe encounter censorship, harassment and violence. In every part of the world, authoritarian rulers are tightening their grip on the media, trying to prevent reporters from holding the powerful to account.

The Washington Post is sadly familiar with these attacks. Our reporter Jason Rezaian was arrested and held inside Tehran's notorious Evin Prison for 544 days , even though he had committed no crime.

For the past seven years, Austin Tice, a freelance journalist whose work has been published in The Post, has been held captive in Syria. We will not rest until he is released and returned safely to the United States.

On Oct. 2, there was a memorial service in Istanbul for Jamal Khashoggi , the Post contributing columnist who was brutally murdered one year ago by an attack squad dispatched by the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
Authoritarians in the Middle East are not the only threat to independent journalism. As we are now witnessing, technology presents another. Digital innovations have opened up incredible opportunities for journalists. But, they are also being used to undermine public trust in legitimate news by sowing confusion about what is real and what is not.

The speed at which information now races across the Internet enables "fake news" to be "weaponized" strategically targeted to achieve a desired effect be it to move financial markets, damage reputations, inflame regional tensions or influence political campaigns.

An MIT study found that fictitious stories spread faster and more widely on Twitter than the truth.
Some have suggested that we have now moved into a world devoid of facts, or where there are "alternative facts." But we must be insistent: Facts matter. The truth matters.

Historically, those dedicated to factual, independent journalism those committed to telling the truth, no matter where it leads could count on support from the government of the United States. America has always set the standard for press freedom around the world. Sadly, that is no longer the case.

Today we are witnessing purposeful, calculated attacks meant to discredit the very integrity of journalism. The attacks are conducted by people who would prefer to wield power free from accountability and out of the public eye.

Threats to take away reporters' credentials, or intentionally spreading misinformation, are part of a deliberate effort to undermine an independent press and other institutions essential to our democracy.

And fair and honest reporting by respected news organizations that contradicts a leader's narrative and pokes holes in his claims gets dismissed as "fake news." The goal is to challenge the veracity of true but unfavorable reporting so that the public will ignore it and tune out.

That truth might not always be what a leader wants to hear. But there is an enormous difference between "unfavorable news" and "fake news." It is wrong to conflate them. Doing so is an attack on the truth and it is corrosive to our democracy.

As long as there have been presidents and reporters covering them, there have been institutional and, at times, personal tensions between them.

Throughout our history, though, these tensions have been a healthy and important part of our democracy.
But today's environment is entirely different in ways that should concern all of us, regardless of our political views. When the president of the United States publicly attacks the press as "enemies of the people," it crosses a line.

After all, "enemy" is a word to describe those we use force against. For vulnerable and misguided individuals, these are more than just words they can be a call to violence.
When the president uses these words, it is dangerous and reckless. He should stop labeling his fellow citizens as "enemies" immediately before it leads to physical harm to innocent Americans.
He, and leaders across the globe, must understand that journalists are not "enemies of the people." They are servants of the people and of the democratic principles that empower the people.

These challenges, and the many others faced by journalists around the world, are daunting. The work journalists do has, perhaps, never been more difficult. But it has also never been more necessary.

Every day, journalists are courageously putting their lives at risk because of the conflict zones they cover, the powerful people they challenge or the wrongdoing they reveal. They are refusing to be intimidated into silence. They are still asking that next question, digging into corruption, and demanding responsibility for crimes and abuses of power.

It is our duty to stand up for these men and women. Their safety must be protected. Their questions to the powerful must be answered. They must be supported and defended as they go about the work that safeguards our freedoms.

There's fake news and there's "bag of wind" editorials. Jinx should be on the BoW News Network.

The crowd at a jinx speaking engagement?

Jinx 2 said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

James O'Keefe defines "fake news."

---

Now post an article about all the investigations he did that were legit and that has exposed corruption, I see those you conveniently ignore.

And thanks for ignoring the actual news about CNN. Exactly what I said would happen.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. Honestly this really isn't anything breaking, everyone already knew this about Zucker and CNN.

---

We are living in challenging times for those who depend on the work of a free press.

---

That's an understatement. I still read the NYT and WaPo, but their standards are slipping in a scary way.

At least some of them know the truth, they just report the opposite.

The media today is horrible .

None can be trusted to be unbiased or accurate.

Merely divisive....for profit .

Canada2017 said:

---

The media today is horrible .

None can be trusted to be unbiased or accurate.

Merely divisive....for profit .

---

for profit or agenda.

CNN is simply a branch of the democratic party and has been for some time.

BearFan33 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

The media today is horrible .

None can be trusted to be unbiased or accurate.

Merely divisive....for profit .

---

for profit or agenda.

CNN is simply a branch of the democratic party and has been for some time.

---

and the NYT, and the LA Times, and the Washington Post, and the Chicago Tribune, and...

And those guys on Fox, damn...

"Fox News analyst Andrew Napolitano directly quoted the Constitution to say why it's wrong for President Donald Trump to host the G-7 at a resort he owns, calling it a "direct and profound" violation.
"He has bought himself an enormous headache now with the choice of this. This is about as direct and profound a violation of the Emoluments Clause as one could create," Napolitano told Neil Cavuto on Fox Business.
Napolitano also pointed to Mick Mulvaney's insistence that Trump would not "profit" from hosting the G-7 Summit at Trump Doral in Florida.
"Most respectfully, Mr. Mulvaney's focus on profit, while it may make sense in the economic world, is not what the Framers were concerned about," Napolitano said. "They were concerned about a gift or cash coming directly or indirectly to the president of the United States, even if it's done at a loss. Now, the president owns shares of stock in a corporation that is one of the owners of this, along with many other investors. He also owns shares of stock in the corporation that manages it. So those corporations will receive a great deal of money from foreign heads of state because this is there."
"That's exactly, exactly what the Emoluments Clause was written to prohibit," he said.
Watch above, via Fox Business."

Jinx 2 said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Jinx 2 said:

---

James O'Keefe defines "fake news."

---

Now post an article about all the investigations he did that were legit and that has exposed corruption, I see those you conveniently ignore.

And thanks for ignoring the actual news about CNN. Exactly what I said would happen.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. Honestly this really isn't anything breaking, everyone already knew this about Zucker and CNN.

---

Not that you care about the truth as long as the lies are told by Trump and his enablers, including O'Keefe, but here's a perspective on why the sort of stuff James O'Keefe does is so harmful--and also why the continual drumbeat of "fake news" eminanting from the most lying president we've ever had, Donald Trump, and his undercutting not only of the media, but of our intelligence and state department staff, is so harmful and destructive to the nation and national security.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/it-is-wrong--and-corrosive--to-conflate-unfavorable-news-and-fake-news/2019/10/11/47966484-ec48-11e9-85c0-85a098e47b37_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1

We are living in challenging times for those who depend on the work of a free press. Every day, journalists across the globe encounter censorship, harassment and violence. In every part of the world, authoritarian rulers are tightening their grip on the media, trying to prevent reporters from holding the powerful to account.

The Washington Post is sadly familiar with these attacks. Our reporter Jason Rezaian was arrested and held inside Tehran's notorious Evin Prison for 544 days , even though he had committed no crime.

For the past seven years, Austin Tice, a freelance journalist whose work has been published in The Post, has been held captive in Syria. We will not rest until he is released and returned safely to the United States.

On Oct. 2, there was a memorial service in Istanbul for Jamal Khashoggi , the Post contributing columnist who was brutally murdered one year ago by an attack squad dispatched by the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
Authoritarians in the Middle East are not the only threat to independent journalism. As we are now witnessing, technology presents another. Digital innovations have opened up incredible opportunities for journalists. But, they are also being used to undermine public trust in legitimate news by sowing confusion about what is real and what is not.

The speed at which information now races across the Internet enables "fake news" to be "weaponized" strategically targeted to achieve a desired effect be it to move financial markets, damage reputations, inflame regional tensions or influence political campaigns.

An MIT study found that fictitious stories spread faster and more widely on Twitter than the truth.
Some have suggested that we have now moved into a world devoid of facts, or where there are "alternative facts." But we must be insistent: Facts matter. The truth matters.

Historically, those dedicated to factual, independent journalism those committed to telling the truth, no matter where it leads could count on support from the government of the United States. America has always set the standard for press freedom around the world. Sadly, that is no longer the case.

Today we are witnessing purposeful, calculated attacks meant to discredit the very integrity of journalism. The attacks are conducted by people who would prefer to wield power free from accountability and out of the public eye.

Threats to take away reporters' credentials, or intentionally spreading misinformation, are part of a deliberate effort to undermine an independent press and other institutions essential to our democracy.

And fair and honest reporting by respected news organizations that contradicts a leader's narrative and pokes holes in his claims gets dismissed as "fake news." The goal is to challenge the veracity of true but unfavorable reporting so that the public will ignore it and tune out.

That truth might not always be what a leader wants to hear. But there is an enormous difference between "unfavorable news" and "fake news." It is wrong to conflate them. Doing so is an attack on the truth and it is corrosive to our democracy.

As long as there have been presidents and reporters covering them, there have been institutional and, at times, personal tensions between them.

Throughout our history, though, these tensions have been a healthy and important part of our democracy.
But today's environment is entirely different in ways that should concern all of us, regardless of our political views. When the president of the United States publicly attacks the press as "enemies of the people," it crosses a line.

After all, "enemy" is a word to describe those we use force against. For vulnerable and misguided individuals, these are more than just words they can be a call to violence.
When the president uses these words, it is dangerous and reckless. He should stop labeling his fellow citizens as "enemies" immediately before it leads to physical harm to innocent Americans.
He, and leaders across the globe, must understand that journalists are not "enemies of the people." They are servants of the people and of the democratic principles that empower the people.

These challenges, and the many others faced by journalists around the world, are daunting. The work journalists do has, perhaps, never been more difficult. But it has also never been more necessary.

Every day, journalists are courageously putting their lives at risk because of the conflict zones they cover, the powerful people they challenge or the wrongdoing they reveal. They are refusing to be intimidated into silence. They are still asking that next question, digging into corruption, and demanding responsibility for crimes and abuses of power.

It is our duty to stand up for these men and women. Their safety must be protected. Their questions to the powerful must be answered. They must be supported and defended as they go about the work that safeguards our freedoms.

---

There is no way you can read this and think it resembles any sort of truth.

How does a Washington reporter compare to a war time reporter? No one is pointing a gun at Wapo Political reporters. The only time a reporter was put in jail was by Obama.

And "servants of the people"?!? My lord, how sanctimonious can a person be? This piece is laughable.

And, that's the problem. NYT, Wapo and the rest of the MSM have totally voided their contract with the people with outright bias, wildly lowering journalistic standards, and outright lies.

I'll agree that The Press is not the enemy of the people. But, they are also not The News. They have just lowered themselves to entertainment built for specific niche audiences.

So where do you get information about things you do not personally experience?

quash said:

---

So where do you get information about things you do not personally experience?

---

NPR and WSJ. Although, sometimes NPR makes me laugh when they go off on a rant
.
Economist for long form.

Edmond Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

So where do you get information about things you do not personally experience?

---

NPR and WSJ. Although, sometimes NPR makes me laugh when they go off on a rant
.
Economist for long form.

---

Ah, thought you were indicting all media.

quash said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

So where do you get information about things you do not personally experience?

---

NPR and WSJ. Although, sometimes NPR makes me laugh when they go off on a rant
.
Economist for long form.

---

Ah, thought you were indicting all media.

---

Nah, my rant was in part to communicate that a person should be able to read the Wapo article that was presented and discount it as wildly biased. A rational person would not present it as evidence of anything.

Edmond Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

So where do you get information about things you do not personally experience?

---

NPR and WSJ. Although, sometimes NPR makes me laugh when they go off on a rant
.
Economist for long form.

---

Ah, thought you were indicting all media.

---

Nah, my rant was in part to communicate that a person should be able to read the Wapo article that was presented and discount it as wildly biased. A rational person would not present it as evidence of anything.

---

Sometimes you can evaluate an article on its own merits, regardless of the source. Quotes, links, etc. that show you how the sausage is made. I grew up reading news in the first section and opinion in the back. Now, you have to read and decide for yourself where the news stops and the opinion starts.