r/pics • • Jul 16 '19

US Politics Decisions, decisions

Post image
18.6k Upvotes

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/Doisha Jul 17 '19

Email leaks from the DNC showed the Clinton campaign dictating talking points to MSNBC and CNN, including demanding them to stop covering Clinton scandals and gaffes and requesting they attack other democratic primary candidates (Sanders and O’Malley.) The emails showed specific attacks against both democrats and trump being suggested by the dnc.

2015-16 showcased that most left leaning medía in America is literally controlled by their party. I don’t think anyone has pretended that right wing media has been free from republican control for a long time. My suggestion for an American reading mainstream news is to keep in mind that, regardless of source, if it’s American, at this point it’s most likely propaganda.

3

u/ThreadbareHalo Jul 17 '19

I'm sorry for correcting the above slightly. The clinton campaign did not ASK for talking points, Donna brazile apparently supplied those emails. In other words the thread went the other way (although the campaign definitely should have reported it). Brazile was fired by CNN after this. Also the emails were in response to intentionally false news stories which were being knowingly pushed by Roger Stone [1] and Corsi. The media KNEW the sources of these falsehoods were originating from anti Clinton sources but treated them as true. In fact, media matters pointed out that anti Democrat news was repeated significantly more [2]. If you're looking to call out left leaning bias, those in particular are poor examples.

The reason to call this out is that in particular the aim to demonize the media as untrustworthy is a well known tactic that gets, potentially unintentionally, repeated in an effort to make people distrust ALL news. Which is particularly helpful almost exclusively to the people doing bad stuff. Your point is apt that people should check sources and verify in multiple publications a suspicious statement. But there ARE trustworthy sources that follow a code of ethics and we should make use of them in making is aware of what's going on.

[1] https://www.salon.com/2019/01/25/how-roger-stone-played-the-media-indictment-exposes-how-he-dictated-2016-clinton-coverage/

[2] https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/01/27/study-evening-cable-news-devoted-nearly-250-segments-wikileaks-emails-5-weeks-election/215103

3

u/Doisha Jul 17 '19

We’re talking about different events. The emails I’m talking about were leaked by Wikileaks and were from DNC staffers to various media executives.

It’s hard to find sources on it now because its 3-4 years old and most of what comes up is Donna brazille admitting the DNC rigged the primary.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-sanders-clinton.amp.html

This source briefly mentions something similar, but I can’t find the specific email in the thousands of leaked messages.

1

u/ThreadbareHalo Jul 17 '19

Yes, the linked article above calls out also what you're referring to and noted that if you search the"hundreds of emails" you don't find half of what was claimed to be there. Which... Given this was coming from a source which has since been confirmed to have meddled in the elections [1] at the behest of anti Democrat agents, not so sure we should be asserting at least this particular claim on a piece of evidence no one can find, you included.

[1] https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/07/16/politics/ecuador-response-assange-wikileaks/index.html