13 ms·
Woman offers WaPo false tale about Roy Moore in effort to discredit the paper
- minimaxir 9y agoThis is not a political/off-topic submission. This is a story that would make an interesting movie. (Although I’m not sure if it would be a drama or comedy)
- threeseed 9y agoHow is this not a political and off-topic submission ?
- burkaman 9y ago"Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon." This phenomenon is at least new to me. As bonus points, it's a nice example of an attempt at social "hacking".
- threeseed 9y agoThis sort of thing goes on every single day. It's not new at all. Politics is not exactly a clean business.
- dragonwriter 9y agoIt is not a new phenomenon. It is not even a new technique for the specific group (James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas) organizing this instance, which has repeatedly and notoriously used similar false-flag techniques to attempt to discredit organizations that are (or are perceived by them to be) on the left side of the American political spectrum.
- Bartweiss 9y agoA major news organization choosing to publish off-the-record comments is itself a pretty significant event that I'm glad to find out about. It's a sign of extreme confidence in their story (and a lot of irritation at Project Veritas), because that's the sort of decision that, if mistaken, can lastingly cripple a publication.
- weeznerps 9y agoI can definitely imagine it as a Coen brothers directed comedy
- gech 9y agoAll conservatives should speak out against Project Veritas and have it shut down.
- british_india 9y agoThe problem is... conservatives are fundamentally dishonest. They don't mind winning dirty. They deserve no respect at all.
- LyndsySimon 9y agoWhy, because WaPo did what they were supposed to? Good on the Washington Post. Project Veritas served its function.
- orf 9y agoDon't paint this as 'Veritas serving its function', their function is not to evaluate but to discredit. They take secret recordings, then create videos using completely out of context clips to push right-wing agendas. Just like the whole 'nothing-burger' video. I'm sure if the reporters had responded to this fake woman's story with any soundbites about how it would effect Moore's election results, regardless of if they published anything or if they kicked her out the door the next minute they would put up a video about how "WaPo reporters are desperate to destroy the honorable Roy Moore!"; just look here is one saying this fake story would be bad for his campaign! Disgusting.
- leifaffles 9y agoThey're activists, but sometimes activists stumble on the truth too.
- orf 9y agoWell, if you throw enough crap at the wall... The question is if the truth they stumble upon outweighs the misinformation and lies they spread to come across it.
- anderber 9y agoPersonally, WaPo is one, if not the top paper in the country. Their dedication to great journalism is why I subscribe. If you're an Amazon Prime member you get a big discount too.
- epmaybe 9y agoIf you're a student, it's free for a year too!
- flippyhead 9y agoWow I had no idea! 6 months free -- that is a great deal
- legitster 9y agoWow. Far from discrediting WaPo it actually strengthened the validity of the accusers. I wonder if this sort of pen-testing could be done more regularly across the industry (by non-shady organizations).
- MBCook 9y agoI fear it would backfire. I’m sure there are groups already claiming this article either: 1. Proves fakers are making up stories against Moore or 2. Is a false flag to try to discredit those claiming #1 When no one is considered credible by both sides I think you would just end up doing more damage. Hasn’t the Rosenhan experiment been used as an argument against the validity of psychology and psychiatry? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment
- legitster 9y agoIt does worry me a bit how it seems the group could have gotten through if they had been a bit less sloppy. On one hand, these groups are clearly out to slander and discredit hard-working, honest people. On the other hand, I don't think the field of journalism should be entirely self-governing. It would give me great peace of mind to see some score that said these news sources were indeed able to turn away fake sources with regularity. The crazy "all mainstream news is fake" crowd will not be swayed, but if nothing is done to appease moderates, there won't be any left.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- jbooth 9y ago".. could have gotten through if they had been a bit less sloppy" .. and if my aunt had different bits she'd be my uncle. Of course a perfectly executed plot with hard-to-fake corroborating details and no holes whatsoever could have fooled them. WaPo reporters aren't perfect. But they ARE genuinely interested in the truth, and interested in doing due diligence to ensure they're reporting it. Above personal politics or personal likes/dislikes of public figures. Conservative media don't seem to understand that. Maybe they can't understand it.
- Lazare 9y agoOuch, I'm getting third-hand embarrassment just reading about it. What amateurs!
- dragonwriter 9y agoThey aren't amateurs, they are literal professionals at this (in that, this is what the group does, repeatedly, for pay—well, donations from right-wing interests—over a period of many years.)
- MBCook 9y agoI assume they mean amateurs in that they are really really bad at it. This is not their first attempt to shamelessly blow up on their face. Yes, this is what they do. But ‘profrssional’ just doesn’t seem like a word that should apply.
- dragonwriter 9y agoSeveral of the other attempts that have “blown up in their face” have been propaganda successes that have driven government policy and lasting belief in the conservative base even after their fraud was revealed. That is, they've been pretty much complete successes where the actual purpose for which they are done is concerned. They are professionals that seem like amateurs if you don't consider their purpose.
- gdubs 9y agoReally interesting from a journalist standpoint to see how the Post investigates a story. The original Moore piece was incredibly meticulous in how it presented the information they had obtained, and was transparent about the process in a way that lets the reader form an opinion on the truthfulness of the story. This piece has a similar meticulousness in how it’s laid out.
- pulisse 9y agoThe guy behind this stunt, James O'Keefe, got his start with funding from Peter Thiel: https://www.villagevoice.com/2009/09/22/conservative-facebook-investor-funded-anti-acorn-videographer/ https://www.villagevoice.com/2009/09/22/conservative-faceboo....
- MBCook 9y agoAnd this is not O’Keefe’s first try at manipulating the media/election: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/30/james-okeefe-accidentally-stings-himself https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/30/james-okeefe-a...
- smcl 9y agoIt's extremely weird reading his reactions on Twitter - either he's putting a very brave face on it, or he's completely unfazed by (yet another) awful self-own. I never know if James O'keefe and his ilk are really into this cause (not sure exactly what, something vaguely conservative?) or if they're just grifters trying to make a buck by whatever means necessary
- kevinburke 9y agoI don't think he cares. The goal is to muddy the waters and make it harder to do real journalism. The story on right wing websites tomorrow will probably be "one of the accusers was obviously lying - this raises questions about the other ones," never mind the lying one was paid by a right wing site.
- microcolonel 9y ago> I don't think he cares. The goal is to muddy the waters and make it harder to do real journalism. I think, generally, the result has been that it's harder to do fake journalism; at least when it comes to the undercover work.
- marcopolitik 9y agoI think it's a bit more complex than that. It's harder to do fake journalism that is liberal or anti-authoritarian; but it's easier than ever to successfully distribute authoritarian and conservative propaganda.
- nwhatt 9y agoI'm interested to see how this plays out - in some respects it's hard to come back at Project Veritas, they'll just say - hey nice work Washington Post you did your job.
- creaghpatr 9y agoSurely it's not the first time the Post (or any MSM outlet) has been pitched a bogus tip. Surprised it doesn't happen more often.
- Lazare 9y agoIt happens constantly, but it's not normally news.
- creaghpatr 9y agoExactly, my company doesn't issue a press release every time an employee avoids a phishing attempt. (Internal pats on the back are appropriate though)
- comatose 9y agoDan Rather, one of the last anchors doing his own reporting, got fired after reporting a bogus GWB story. A staffer was somewhat responsible for airing it, but that was the price of letting the staffer vet the story. I could probably think of some others that did make the news, but overall you're right. Typically The misinformation is front page and the retraction is weeks later, if at al, and as far from prominent as they can make it.
- MBCook 9y agoI imagine it doesn’t usually rise to the level of ‘news’. It’s privably someone trying to make a competitor look bad or jump on a bandwagon. This time it was an attempt to undermine journalism in a tricky situation.
- nerfhammer 9y agoAFAIK it does happen a lot. Normally it just wouldn't be publicized. This time they figured out it was not only false but an organized disinformation campaign and invested the time in documenting that instead.
- bradleyankrom 9y ago100% serious question: how long before Project Veritas or others on the far right start accusing the WaPo of fabricating the bungled sting story in order to embarrass them? edit: changed "right" to "far right"
- thesmallestcat 9y agoProviding her real name was quite the blunder. Gave WP what they needed to make sense of the unraveling story, and permanently attached her identity to clumsy deceit.
- tomc1985 9y agoThey believe she attempted to deceive her in bad faith, in order to affect the campaign of a public official. As they state, (and as US courts will stand behind) she entered into the agreement in bad faith and was caught, and they voided said agreement.
- thesmallestcat 9y agoI'm not sure who you're arguing with, like I said, Phillips blundered by giving them her real name. WP is definitely allowed to publish it.
- tomc1985 9y agoI think I read OP as defending Ms Philips' mistaken expectations of privacy. My bad
- thesmallestcat 9y ago[I] should be less ambiguous [in my comments] :)
- toxican 9y agois "off the record" even legally binding?
- c0nducktr 9y agoNo. It's similar to that "if you're a cop you have to tell me" thing. Basically meaningless.
- 9y ago
- vkou 9y ago>“I’m moving to New York!” the May 29 appeal said. “I’ve accepted a job to work in the conservative media movement to combat the lies and deceipt of the liberal MSM. I’ll be using my skills as a researcher and fact-checker to help our movement. I was laid off from my mortgage job a few months ago and came across the opportunity to change my career path.” The hypocrisy is... Well, there's a lot of nasty words for it.
- rybosome 9y agoThis is a telling look at the intense self-righteousness felt by that segment. They knowingly engage in fraud and deception, believing that it is justified because their enemies do it more or first or something.
- tomc1985 9y agoIt's that weird objective-but-really-not style of writing commonly seen as nonsense output from ideologues
- gkya 9y agoThe cases involving intimate/sexual relations (consensual or not) are really difficult to address, and the general approach we have as the (at least nominally) secular and democratic part of the world is just crazy. Probably most allegations in most cases are true, but as it is now any male is quite open to the abuse of the general stance of the society and the law. Even being accused of something can easily ruin one's life, despite the "innocent until proven guilty" principle. If it's allowed to weaponise slander so easily, it actually hurts also whom suffer from sexual violence, reducing the credibility of their claims when they try to come out and pursue justice.
- MBCook 9y agoThe problem is the bar has been way too high until now. “He’s important/beloved/whatever, he wouldn’t do that. It’s just your word against his”. And a lot of men escaped a LOT of charges because of that. I think we’re still pretty far from the pendulum going too extreme. We’ll have to figure out the balance. But what’s happening right now still seems pretty healthy. The fact that so many stories can be found so easily and corroborated shows what has been waiting in the wings.
- gkya 9y agoIt's not acceptable to punish today's men for what men of past got away with. That's vendetta, blood feud, primitive. What I watch happening is lots of decisions happening based on nothing. That all or most the particular men accused at the moment are actually guilty is of no interest to me. But the way we decide on anecdotes and stories is. When we decide before the courts, we commit irreversible damage. If we say once Joe Person is a molester or a rapist or a paedophile, and then he's proven innocent, it's basically impossible to find every single person who has read the wrong accusations and convince them otherwise. Also, it's not only the bar that is lowering, the definition of what's normal advances and what's molesting is changing. In not so distant past invasive behaviour of men were even expected in some circumstances. Good that we do away with these problematic behaviours and protect people from unwanted experiences, but that in no way legitimises leaving people defenceless in front of slander.
- oh_sigh 9y agoFunny that PV brings their undercover actors right in the front door of their offices. I'm guessing they aren't going to be doing that from now on, knowing that at the very least WaPo is watching who enters.
- AceJohnny2 9y agoCold-war era intelligence agents must be shaking their heads in disbelief. It's not the ones you catch you should be worried about, it's the ones you don't...
- oskarth 9y agoIs there a problem? Well played on both sides. WaPo won this round and brags about it, rightly. It's not too dissimilar from the adversarial justice system, but in a different domain, to be honest.
- zbyte64 9y agoBecause the justice system depends on entrapment and fraud?
- s73ver_ 9y agoI would suggest that Project Veritas acting in this manner is very much a problem. Remember, they weren't just trying to discredit a major journalism institution here, but sexaul assault victims everywhere.
- pulisse 9y agoIt's not too dissimilar from the adversarial justice system, but in a different domain, to be honest. If this were analogous to a judicial proceeding, it would be one in which one side submitted fabricated evidence. How is that "well played on both sides"?
- kstrauser 9y agoTakeaway: WaPo vets their sources and stories a lot more than certain political figures claim they do.
- mudil 9y agoWashington Post silent on AMAZON warehouse conditions? Of course! 'Journalism' ends at owner's paycheck... (link: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/timed-toilet-breaks-impossible-targets-11587888 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/timed-toilet-breaks-imp...)
- wnevets 9y agoWhy hasn't James O'Keefe been arrested yet? He he been caught committing fraud multiple times.
- maxerickson 9y agoI don't think it is particularly illegal to lie to a reporter.
- kbenson 9y agoIt may be illegal to trick someone else into publishing slander. WaPo might feel defrauded, and might have a case for that. IANAL though, so that's pure speculation on my part.
- hsod 9y agoHe actually was arrested (and convicted), for lying to gain access to a Senator's office: http://thehill.com/capital-living/in-the-know/100105-filmmaker-okeefe-sentenced-in-sen-mary-landrieu-break-in http://thehill.com/capital-living/in-the-know/100105-filmmak...
- danso 9y agoA lot of good laughs from this incident. I actually feel a bit sad for the woman who got hired to play the fake victim. She was recently laid off from from her mortgage job when she apparently accepted the job with Veritas, but she needed to start a GoFundMe just to move up there (and she only got 2 donors, one of which was her own daughter) Veritas tasks her with the main role in busting the Washington Post with an undercover sting. But it doesn't look like she got any training or preparation at all. She used her real name when talking to the WaPo, had a phone number with the wrong area code (given her claimed state of residence), and Veritas didn't remind her to remove her GoFundMe page, which is how the WaPo ultimately confirmed that she was a fraud. I'm definitely not a fan of Veritas or O'Keefe's bullshit, and this woman has to bear responsibility for her poor choices. But damn, if your mission was sincerely to expose the truth about the purportedly corrupt media, wouldn't you put more prep into it? It's not like Veritas is lacking in resources -- their latest 990 says they had an operating surplus of $1.3M and O'Keefe received $235,471 in salary https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3454912-Project-Veritas-2015-Form-990.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3454912-Project-Veri... edit: the 2016 990 was just released today. O'Keefe's salary is $317K and the org's revenue increased from 3.7M to 4.8M. Not bad at all.
- KVFinn 9y ago>edit: the 2016 990 was just released today. O'Keefe's salary is $317K and the org's revenue increased from 3.7M to 4.8M. Not bad at all. Source of their income here: https://twitter.com/alexkotch/status/935278757862170624 https://twitter.com/alexkotch/status/935278757862170624
- DonHopkins 9y agohttps://web.archive.org/web/20171122195050/https:/www.gofundme.com/JaimeToNewYork https://web.archive.org/web/20171122195050/https:/www.gofund... "I'm moving to New York! I've accepted a job to work in the conservative media movement to combat the lies and deceipt of the liberal MSM. I'll be using my skills as a researcher and fact-checker to help our movement." She was fully aware that her job was to lie and deceive the Washington Post, yet she claimed she aspired to "combat the lies and deceipt of the liberal MSM". She claimed to have "skills as a researcher and fact-checker", yet she was blindsided and busted by skilled liberal MSM researchers and fact-checkers. She should learn how to use a spell-checker, too. I don't feel bad at all for that mendacious hypocrite.
- d--b 9y agoIt's incredible how mainstream these kinds of practice have become. We are more happy that WaPo didn't fall for the sting than angry that there was a sting in the first place! I can't believe how much the media landscape changed in the past 2 years... I feel such powerlessness against it. As long as deep pocketed people are ready to pay to spread lies, I don't see any way to stop them.
- alfithehermutt 9y agoThe uva scandal and other hoaxes has made people lose faith in the media. The lack of faith is also a bipartisan issue. The alt left and alt right are growing and hate the msm.
- DonHopkins 9y agoExcept the alt-left doesn't exist except in the alt-right's imagination.
- LeeHwang 9y agoProbably meant the hard-left, democrats call the alt-left the hard-left (ex. clinton, the mainstream media). Republicans (trump, the republican media) are trying to rebrand the hard left as the alt-left. And the hard left most definitely exists.
- DonHopkins 9y agoHe specifically meant to use the term "alt-left", parroting Trump's and David Duke's own words, just the way right-wing Republicans love to use the incorrect term "Democrat Party" on purpose as an insult. The alt-right pretending the alt-left exists is "thing", a talking point, a false equivalence, and a mendacious lie. It's a dog-whistle attempting to normalize the alt-right and Nazis, and accuse the left of acting as extreme and irrational as alt-right Whit Supremacists are acting, which is total bullshit. Being anti-Nazi and anti-racist and anti-misogynist isn't "alt-left", it's "patriotic" and "democratic" and "American" and "mainstream" and "sane" and "ethical". It's not "hard left" to be anti-Nazi. Even hard right Republicans SHOULD be anti-Nazi too, but apparently now they're not any more. Don't blame it on the left that the right has gone off the deep end and now consider Nazis "very fine people". That doesn't make the left "hard". The "alt-left" didn't invade Nazi Germany on D-Day, the Allied Forces did. And the Allied Forces never behaved anything like the way the alt-right is behaving. https://www.wired.com/story/what-is-alt-left/ https://www.wired.com/story/what-is-alt-left/ There is no 'Alt-Left,' no matter what Trump says. Hours after a rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, organized by white nationalists, turned deadly, President Donald Trump blamed "many sides" for the violence that transpired. Three days later, at an impromptu press conference at Trump Tower, the president doubled down on this message, condemning groups "on both sides" of the fighting. “What about the alt-left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt-right?” the president said. https://newrepublic.com/minutes/141108/no-thing-alt-left https://newrepublic.com/minutes/141108/no-thing-alt-left There is no such thing as the "alt-left". But in a piece for Vanity Fair, James Wolcott pretends otherwise: >Disillusionment with Obama’s presidency, loathing of Hillary Clinton, disgust with “identity politics,” and a craving for a climactic reckoning that will clear the stage for a bold tomorrow have created a kinship between the “alt-right” and an alt-left. They’re not kissin’ cousins, but they caterwaul some of the same tunes in different keys. Wolcott admits the left “can’t match” the alt-right “for strength, malignancy, or tentacled reach”—then proceeds to make just such an argument. This is bad writing in service of a bad argument: “People say things I don’t like” is not the same thing as “people advocate for a white ethnostate.” This is precisely the false equivalency Wolcott makes by using the phrase “alt-left.” It is a disingenuous characterization designed to undermine leftist claims.
- beedogs 9y agoShutting "Project Veritas" down seems like the next step in all this. What a bunch of clowns.
- foobaw 9y agoAnd they just posted a "rebuttal" video. https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/935283210606477312 https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/935283210606477312
- kbenson 9y agoErr, so I see a defense of the news arm and it's impartiality and acknowledgement that the editorial section has an ax to grind? Is that supposed to be some big expose? That's the point of the editorial department, a chance for reporters to give opinions rather than be impartial. The sad part is that people might assume it actually supports the position that WaPo can't be trusted. That seems to be the norm these days. Say something and throw out random video or audio as evidence when it isn't anything of the sort, since most people won't pay enough attention to really check and will just assume that if it was presented as evidence, it must be evidence. :/
- Overtonwindow 9y agoThis is unfortunate but I support Veritas. I think, in general, they do good work in exposing corruption, and bias. Just because WaPo caught them this time doesn't mean they're wrong, or WaPo is wrong. The past few years have given me a deep distrust of all media.
- nadagast 9y agoThis would be a reasonable opinion if the far right reacted to this event by giving credit to WaPo--if their genuine interest was in the truth and good reporting. Unfortunately truth and good reporting is not their goal, and this entire story will be presented in a very different light on far right sites.
- Malician 9y agoFrom my perspective the fake "Bernie Bernstein" calls claiming to be from the WP, the disproven claims of an audio tape of WP reporters offering 1000$(sp), the claims that Olde Hickory House didn't exist at the address which were disproven by newspaper ads and other evidence, the claims that the county was dry at the time Moore was alleged to have bought girls alcohol (it was not and the pizzeria actually served wine) - All of these come together to be a flood of unvetted claims to keep Moore ahead until the election. It doesn't matter if they're disproven because many voters hear about them and take them as gospel without ever hearing the other side of the story.
- maxerickson 9y agoWhat's your favorite example of their good work?
- Overtonwindow 9y agoAcorn.
- mejari 9y ago...was proven to be completely innocent of the actions they were accused of.
- rabboRubble 9y agoI am a huge news junkie. Probably why I am a Hacker News follower. With the Trump news cycle at a max burn setting lately, I ran out of mobile browsers to read WaPo articles for free. While I also have the same issue with the NYTimes, WaPo's journalism has been at Stand-by-Me-sic-balls level lately. Thoroughly enjoyable. Also an Amazon Prime member, so I'm getting my 6 months free trial and a discounted rate thereafter.
- Grue3 9y ago>But on Monday morning, Post reporters saw her walking into the New York offices of Project Veritas, an organization that targets the mainstream news media and left-leaning groups. So they basically stalked her? Interesting to see how WP treats some (all?) whistleblowers that come their way.