Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Tuesday June 27 2017, @02:48PM   Printer-friendly
from the who-watches-the-retractions dept.

From Breitbart:

Another day, another very fake news story from the network President Donald Trump has identified as "very fake news."

CNN's Thomas Frank on Thursday evening published what would have been considered an explosive report if remotely true: One anonymous source told him both the Treasury Department and Senate Intelligence Committee are probing a Russian investment fund with ties to several senior finance world leaders close to President Trump. Only problem? Both Trump administration officials and those close to Senate GOP leadership say it's simply untrue.

The retraction from CNN:

On June 22, 2017, CNN.com published a story connecting Anthony Scaramucci with investigations into the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
That story did not meet CNN's editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled. CNN apologizes to Mr. Scaramucci.

According to BuzzFeed News, CNN has responded by actually requiring executives to review stories:

CNN is imposing strict new publishing restrictions for online articles involving Russia after the network deleted a story and then issued a retraction late Friday, according to an internal email obtained by BuzzFeed News.

The email went out at 11:21 a.m. on Saturday from Rich Barbieri, the CNNMoney executive editor, saying "No one should publish any content involving Russia without coming to me and Jason," a CNN vice president.

At least now we'll know who to blame.


[Ed Note: I debated leaving this in politics or dropping it to the main page. I opted for the latter because politics or not, the prevalence of "fake news" is one that we deal with on a daily basis from our respective social media feeds to all the major broadcast and cable news networks. How are we to tell what is "fake" and what is actually (relatively) "true"? The main stream media all put their spin on everything. A right slant for some, a left slant for others. Is the truth somewhere in between, or is it a story that we aren't getting becasue the mainstream media is so intent on telling their narrative that we the people are getting the shit end of the stick regardless of where we get the so called news?]

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 27 2017, @06:36PM (4 children)

    by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday June 27 2017, @06:36PM (#532060)

    Should have, yes. That's why they're being fired, at least in theory.

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday June 27 2017, @09:47PM (3 children)

    by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday June 27 2017, @09:47PM (#532149) Journal

    Not being fired, resigning. I suspect due to professional integrity. Let's not prejudge the affair, like Briefdart wants us to do.

    • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:14PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:14PM (#532182)

      Not being fired, resigning. I suspect due to professional integrity.

      You are joking, right? Please tell me that you are joking. You really can not be this naive! I'm pretty sure they did not willingly fall on their swords to uphold what we might derisively refer to as their "professional integrity". Most likely, the three of them were called into the bosses office and given an ultimatum: either resign immediately or be fired. At least that is my understanding of how these sorts of scandals usually play out.

      Let's not prejudge the affair, like Briefdart wants us to do.

      Oh, FFS! Screw what Brightfart does or does not want us to do! I don't need them (or anyone else, for that matter) leading me by the nose to the "correct" interpretation of these sorry events. It doesn't take that much psychic power to read those tea leaves.

      • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:24PM (1 child)

        by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:24PM (#532186) Journal

        At least that is my understanding of how these sorts of scandals usually play out.

        Dear AC: thank you for sharing your deepest, most private thoughts on the matter. You do realize that in Greek, private is ιδιωτικός, or in latinized characters, "idiotic"? Well, it is.

        So you have any idea who the journalists in question are? Are you an enfante terrible>/i> like most of these alt-right types, totally ignorant of history, and thus unable to judge character, credibility and veracity, and so constant victim of fake news? If you knew the persons involved, your understanding, which is very cute, by the way, would be different.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 28 2017, @02:50PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 28 2017, @02:50PM (#532473)

          The battle is lost. The alt-stupid have prevailed. Save yourself while you can.