4 ms·

Speaking of news. Anyone know why CNN "leaking" debate questions to presidential questions was quickly forgotten. Atleast with Russia we somewhat know who the e

Speaking of news. Anyone know why CNN "leaking" debate questions to presidential questions was quickly forgotten. Atleast with Russia we somewhat know who the enemy but who is behind insidious actors who are leaking questions and why are they doing it. Was it really just one bad actor?

krapp 8y ago
The Trump campaign and his right wing supporters tried to present it as a scandal which should not only disqualify Hillary Clinton from running, but which proved a criminal, possibly treasonous, conspiracy by the DNC and Clinton to undermine the American political process and "rig the election." It was quickly forgotten about because the right wing overplayed the anti-leftist outrage card, as they tend to do, and only people already invested in their conspiratorial rhetoric could muster the effort to care.
- dominotw 8y ago
  why don't regular people care about though. Isn't it a big deal? Why aren't such acts considered 'fake news'.
  - krapp 8y ago
    No, it wasn't a big deal, certainly not as big a deal as Trump supporters want to imply - a scandal on par with Watergate. The fallout and consequences were in correct proportion to their relevance. Donna Brazile resigned, CNN cut ties with her, the news cycle eventually moved on.
    - dominotw 8y ago
      Can your tell me why it isn't a big deal without framing it wrt to "trump supporters".Surely its possible to look at this without partisan lens. As a regular citizen I think its a big deal because 1. It eroded publics confidence in MSM giving rise to alternative/fake news sites. 2. What about Donna Brazile's collaborators. Surely she didn't pull this off all by herself. 3. What were the motivations of collaborators at CNN, why did they do it.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - krapp 8y ago
        > Can your tell me why it isn't a big deal without framing it wrt to "trump supporters". Can you tell me why you believe it should be a bigger deal than it was? Numerous articles were written about it, someone lost their job, what else do you believe should happen? Can you tell me why you started this non-sequitur thread to begin with? TFA isn't about Hillary Clinton's campaign or the scandal surrounding her having been given advance notice of questions, so why bring it up? >Surely its possible to look at this without partisan lens. It is possible, but partisan politics is inextricably linked to the subject at hand, and the only people still bringing it up are people with a partisan agenda.
        dominotw 8y ago
        > Can you tell me why you believe it should be a bigger deal than it was? I explicitly stated why I thought it was big deal. >> As a regular citizen I think its a big deal because >> 1. It eroded publics confidence in MSM giving rise to alternative/fake news sites. > what else do you believe should happen? Also addressed this >> 2. What about Donna Brazile's collaborators. Surely she didn't pull this off all by herself. >> 3. What were the motivations of collaborators at CNN, why did they do it. I want answers to those questions. And possibly releasing the debate questions to everyone instead of pretending like they are secret. I really want to know why they are pretending that they are secret when they are not. Regular ppl are just idiots to be fucked with? Merely firing one sacrificial lamb is not enough, why would i possibly care about a multimillonare's job at CNN. More honesty and not taking people for idiots would be a good outcome. You know like a change that would prevent this from happening in future. > Can you tell me why you started this non-sequitur thread to begin with? As I mentioned it many times, this to me was one of those things that "trump supporters" used to discredit the media and create fakenews. CNN never coming clean didn't help the case.
untog 8y ago
IMO, the question leaking is interesting because it highlights the information asymmetry in the DNC leaks. Donna Brazile was able to get a copy of the debate questions not because someone hacked in and got them for her, but because CNN just... gave them to her. Because she was a contributor to the network that was going to be talking about the debate. There were Republican contributors in the same role who presumably also received a copy of the questions (we would have heard if they didn't, I'm sure), so I personally work on the basis that both candidates have known the questions for (at least) CNN debates for quite some time. The only reason we know the DNC did is because of the e-mail leaks, we certainly don't know that the RNC didn't. I don't say this to excuse anyone involved, just that it's often sold as a left vs right scandal and I really don't think it is. I think it shows how little CNN cares about the integrity of things like this. On a broader level, it isn't talked about that much because IMO it just didn't have that big of an effect. The topic of the debate was known in advance (economy, foreign policy, etc) and it wouldn't have taken a rocket scientist to prepare a list of very likely questions. Certainly, it could have fueled distrust in the mainstream media, but that's something people do talk about at great length, so in a way it's just become one evidence point in a much larger debate.
- dominotw 8y ago
  Yea what you said makes sense to me. > so I personally work on the basis that both candidates have known the questions for (at least) CNN debates for quite some time. People prlby already assume these debates are already staged like WWE matches. MSM is just tasked with organising this farce. I never paid attention to these debates before but I found it shocking that such ridiculous farce can be organised at such high levels. Why can't they just reveal the questions to everyone beforehand instead of pretending like they are some sort of secret. Makes me wonder what else is staged. Is this whole russia thing also staged by both parties. > it could have fueled distrust in the mainstream media, but that's something people do talk about at great length, Can you link me one high level article talking about this. I almost never hear about it.
- kryogen1c 8y ago
  > The only reason we know the DNC did is because of the e-mail leaks, we certainly don't know that the RNC didn't. This is prototypical of politics in America, and it's mind boggling: "the current president said he'd do something and then didn't do it!" Said by every D and R about every R and D. I wish we could examine systemicly, instead of along party lines.

krapp 8y ago

The Trump campaign and his right wing supporters tried to present it as a scandal which should not only disqualify Hillary Clinton from running, but which proved a criminal, possibly treasonous, conspiracy by the DNC and Clinton to undermine the American political process and "rig the election." It was quickly forgotten about because the right wing overplayed the anti-leftist outrage card, as they tend to do, and only people already invested in their conspiratorial rhetoric could muster the effort to care.

dominotw 8y ago
why don't regular people care about though. Isn't it a big deal? Why aren't such acts considered 'fake news'.
- krapp 8y ago
  No, it wasn't a big deal, certainly not as big a deal as Trump supporters want to imply - a scandal on par with Watergate. The fallout and consequences were in correct proportion to their relevance. Donna Brazile resigned, CNN cut ties with her, the news cycle eventually moved on.
  - dominotw 8y ago
    Can your tell me why it isn't a big deal without framing it wrt to "trump supporters".Surely its possible to look at this without partisan lens. As a regular citizen I think its a big deal because 1. It eroded publics confidence in MSM giving rise to alternative/fake news sites. 2. What about Donna Brazile's collaborators. Surely she didn't pull this off all by herself. 3. What were the motivations of collaborators at CNN, why did they do it.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - krapp 8y ago
      > Can your tell me why it isn't a big deal without framing it wrt to "trump supporters". Can you tell me why you believe it should be a bigger deal than it was? Numerous articles were written about it, someone lost their job, what else do you believe should happen? Can you tell me why you started this non-sequitur thread to begin with? TFA isn't about Hillary Clinton's campaign or the scandal surrounding her having been given advance notice of questions, so why bring it up? >Surely its possible to look at this without partisan lens. It is possible, but partisan politics is inextricably linked to the subject at hand, and the only people still bringing it up are people with a partisan agenda.
      - dominotw 8y ago
        > Can you tell me why you believe it should be a bigger deal than it was? I explicitly stated why I thought it was big deal. >> As a regular citizen I think its a big deal because >> 1. It eroded publics confidence in MSM giving rise to alternative/fake news sites. > what else do you believe should happen? Also addressed this >> 2. What about Donna Brazile's collaborators. Surely she didn't pull this off all by herself. >> 3. What were the motivations of collaborators at CNN, why did they do it. I want answers to those questions. And possibly releasing the debate questions to everyone instead of pretending like they are secret. I really want to know why they are pretending that they are secret when they are not. Regular ppl are just idiots to be fucked with? Merely firing one sacrificial lamb is not enough, why would i possibly care about a multimillonare's job at CNN. More honesty and not taking people for idiots would be a good outcome. You know like a change that would prevent this from happening in future. > Can you tell me why you started this non-sequitur thread to begin with? As I mentioned it many times, this to me was one of those things that "trump supporters" used to discredit the media and create fakenews. CNN never coming clean didn't help the case.

untog 8y ago

IMO, the question leaking is interesting because it highlights the information asymmetry in the DNC leaks. Donna Brazile was able to get a copy of the debate questions not because someone hacked in and got them for her, but because CNN just... gave them to her. Because she was a contributor to the network that was going to be talking about the debate. There were Republican contributors in the same role who presumably also received a copy of the questions (we would have heard if they didn't, I'm sure), so I personally work on the basis that both candidates have known the questions for (at least) CNN debates for quite some time. The only reason we know the DNC did is because of the e-mail leaks, we certainly don't know that the RNC didn't. I don't say this to excuse anyone involved, just that it's often sold as a left vs right scandal and I really don't think it is. I think it shows how little CNN cares about the integrity of things like this. On a broader level, it isn't talked about that much because IMO it just didn't have that big of an effect. The topic of the debate was known in advance (economy, foreign policy, etc) and it wouldn't have taken a rocket scientist to prepare a list of very likely questions. Certainly, it could have fueled distrust in the mainstream media, but that's something people do talk about at great length, so in a way it's just become one evidence point in a much larger debate.

dominotw 8y ago
Yea what you said makes sense to me. > so I personally work on the basis that both candidates have known the questions for (at least) CNN debates for quite some time. People prlby already assume these debates are already staged like WWE matches. MSM is just tasked with organising this farce. I never paid attention to these debates before but I found it shocking that such ridiculous farce can be organised at such high levels. Why can't they just reveal the questions to everyone beforehand instead of pretending like they are some sort of secret. Makes me wonder what else is staged. Is this whole russia thing also staged by both parties. > it could have fueled distrust in the mainstream media, but that's something people do talk about at great length, Can you link me one high level article talking about this. I almost never hear about it.
kryogen1c 8y ago
> The only reason we know the DNC did is because of the e-mail leaks, we certainly don't know that the RNC didn't. This is prototypical of politics in America, and it's mind boggling: "the current president said he'd do something and then didn't do it!" Said by every D and R about every R and D. I wish we could examine systemicly, instead of along party lines.