|
Post by Vince524 on Jul 7, 2017 23:25:42 GMT -5
For the record, I'm not worried about him. I am concerned a little about his family. Mostly, I think it was boneheaded on CNN's part, because they made themselves the story, and while none of us have any tremendous sympathy for him, what about the next guy?
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 8, 2017 0:17:50 GMT -5
For the record, I'm not worried about him. I am concerned a little about his family. Mostly, I think it was boneheaded on CNN's part, because they made themselves the story, and while none of us have any tremendous sympathy for him, what about the next guy? What about him? Who says he's GOT a family? Trolls don't have sex lives. If they did they wouldn't spend so much time online trolling so hard. Even if he does, SFW? What they should be concerned about is being related to such a flaming bigoted douchenozzle. If you don't think there's no tremendous sympathy here for HanAssholeSolo, you haven't read the post calling him an "artist" who needs to be free to express his "artwork." That one was overflowing with tremendous sympathy. And other things that overflow and don't smell too good...
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 8, 2017 6:41:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 8, 2017 9:38:22 GMT -5
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info/link.
So Trump had an enabler. How is that something that could be found out through investigative journalism--i.e., who texted or emailed it to him?
Here's a wild guess: it was Don Jr.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 8, 2017 11:25:41 GMT -5
That would be my guess, as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 11:31:54 GMT -5
Just dropping in to note that Don Jr. is a collosal, classless, ignorant ass who either lies or has a reckless disregard for truth (or both). I have been watching him on Twitter, and have grown to despise him.
In contrast, I don't think Ivanka's role in the admin is appropriate, and given she has it, it annoys me that she seems to simply enable her father rather than defend principles she claims to espouse, but I don't detest her and I don't find her vulgar. Don Jr. I'd loathe even if he were John Q. Random Member of the Public Jr.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jul 8, 2017 13:44:19 GMT -5
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info/link. So Trump had an enabler. How is that something that could be found out through investigative journalism--i.e., who texted or emailed it to him? Here's a wild guess: it was Don Jr. I was going to mention it, but Rob beat me to it. I can't find the link, but I watched a vid clip of a CNN reporter stating that this was the reason that they were investigating the video clip in the first place. That led them to the Reddit subforum, which led them to the person who made the GIF the video was based on, but they never actually tracked down the person who made the actual video. The thing that Trump shared was not made by the troll they tracked down. Unfortunately...and this is just my take on it...they lost perspective on what the focus of their story originally was and should've been; the implication that either Trump or whomever gave him that vid might be visiting racist, garbage sites. That brings up important questions about why people in the administration, and even POTUS himself, would be spending time on these types of sites. Maybe they're even posting there anonymously too? That might be a stretch, but it would be within the realm of possibility and worthy of investigation. But, instead, CNN focused on some internet shit-posting troll (as if there aren't a million of them out there) and totally lost sight of the important implications of this kind of story. And, in the process, have damaged their reputation even further, which was already on life support in a lot of people's eyes because of the resignations, the Van Jones video (which they mostly ignored), the video of a CNN producer calling CNN's Russia coverage "bullshit" (which they also mostly ignored), and the other video of the other CNN producer calling voters stupid (which they also mostly ignored). I'm not saying those other stories are legitimate, because it's mostly gotcha bullshit from that other idiot troll James O'Keefe (why is he not in jail?), but those stories were all over social media last week, leading up to the "blackmail/doxxing" story. Right before that story came out, Trump and the media were dead even when it comes to how much the public distrusts them (~64%). I hope this doesn't hurt the media's trustworthiness even more because, if so, Trump will feel like he's won. And he wouldn't be totally wrong for thinking that. I want CNN to be more trustworthy. I want the press to do their jobs fairly, objectively, and vigorously. Dumb shit like this isn't helpful but lately it seems like a regular thing for CNN.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 8, 2017 14:36:29 GMT -5
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info/link. So Trump had an enabler. How is that something that could be found out through investigative journalism--i.e., who texted or emailed it to him? Here's a wild guess: it was Don Jr. I was going to mention it, but Rob beat me to it. I can't find the link, but I watched a vid clip of a CNN reporter stating that this was the reason that they were investigating the video clip in the first place. That led them to the Reddit subforum, which led them to the person who made the GIF the video was based on, but they never actually tracked down the person who made the actual video. The thing that Trump shared was not made by the troll they tracked down. Perhaps they did attempt to track down the video Trump used but hit a dead end? Just a thought. Or it could be as you suggest, they gave up because they had enough of a "story" in finding the original creator. Asshole was the original creator (put the CNN logo on the face of the guy Trump slammed) as far as I understand. I kind of doubt they just gave up, because that would have been a big story. Sounds more like they couldn't link anything to anyone. Or maybe someone is still working on it? Without reading all 22 pages of that study, "the media" is not "CNN." I don't trust a lot of the media either. I don't 100% trust CNN, but as far as cable news goes, I think they're pretty okay. Relatively speaking. Now, speaking of Van Jones--I really, really admire him for his take on so many things, especially regarding how the left should try to understand Trump supporters in general. Also that whole quote from him you linked re: the Russia probe, I totally agree with. I was getting really sick of CNN's coverage of that. Every time I turned on the TV, it seemed it was ONLY that, for a couple of months, until CNN made that grievously erroneous accusation about someone whose name I don't even remember and then suddenly, the next day, they started covering the healthcare issue and tax reform and a bunch of other things... and they have done a decent job covering the G20 summit, imo. They seem to have recalibrated. Also, they get access to both Democrat and Republican senators and representatives for interviews and questions (though not Trump, of course). Fair enough. I want them to do that too. However, I don't think this whole debacle surrounding Mr. Asshole indicates that they are now--how did you phrase it in your OP?--a garbage dump of an organization.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jul 8, 2017 15:43:07 GMT -5
Perhaps they did attempt to track down the video Trump used but hit a dead end? Just a thought. Then they should've (or hopefully would've) said that. I never said nor suggested that they simply "gave up." I said that they lost perspective on what the original focus of the story was and should have been. To me, it seems like perhaps they were investigating the story about Trump and got side-tracked (maybe they hit a few, quick dead ends?) and caught up in the flashy, click-baityness of finding the creator of the original GIF that the video clip that Trump shared was based on. I'm not convinced there was a conscious decision to "give up" on the actual important issues. I view it more akin to a monkey swinging on a vine and getting distracted by something shiny and falling off the vine or a dog chasing a stick and getting distracted by a passing fire truck and chasing it instead. To me, this suggests a type of wrong-headed, "entertainment value" thinking that someone like Jeff Zucker probably infected CNN with, which is why I mostly blame him for their decline over the past few years. I could be totally wrong, because "correlation does not necessarily equal causation," but I have my suspicions. Me too. Which is why I never said that "they just gave up." If they couldn't link anything to anyone, then there wasn't actually a story there. If that is the case, then they made one up out of possibly desperation or a misguided thirst for having "breaking news" or a "scoop" that other outlets didn't care about. The fact that it was only CNN who chased down this troll suggests that other organizations didn't feel that the troll was an important story or should've been the focus of the story. They were right. The focus should've been Trump. Now, CNN is the only org with egg on their face regarding this issue. No, but they are part of the media and their reputation getting thrashed contributes to an overall negative view of the media (in general). None of that has anything to do with the fact that the sum of these bullshit "hidden camera" stories and the resignations and this "blackmail" story gives many people the impression that CNN has an agenda or is otherwise lying to the public ("fake news"). I think people who have that view are wrong but I also totally understand how a string of 4 or 5 controversies involving CNN happening all within a week or two of each other gives ammo to people with that opinion. If it were just the HanAssholeSolo story (and, really, he missed an opportunity because a better name would've been HanAssHolo), then I would probably agree with you. But, it wasn't *just* that story. It's the sum of all of them that have happened recently. I listed 4 other controversies involving CNN that have all happened, one after another, over the past week or two. Only two out of the 5 are legitimate fuck-ups on CNN's part. The other 3 were bullshit "gotcha" stories by that troll O'Keefe, and they were all (to quote Van Jones) nothing burgers. But, in the eyes of people who might be less informed about these things, they could all be taken as "proof" of "fake news." (they'd be wrong, but lots of voters are stupid and wrong).
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 8, 2017 16:06:40 GMT -5
So.... CNN should start catering to stupid people?
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jul 8, 2017 19:06:21 GMT -5
So.... CNN should start catering to stupid people? "Less informed about these things" (meaning, people who aren't as plugged into political news as we are) does not in any way imply "stupid." Everyone you ever come into contact with will be more informed on some things than you, and you will be more informed on other things than them. That does not mean that you're both "stupid." Though, I suppose it doesn't necessarily mean the opposite either.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 8, 2017 20:35:14 GMT -5
My problem with CNN in this regard is that there was a threat to expose him publicly if he made a gif again regarding them. It had nothing to do with their defense of Islam, women, Jews, the Pope, covfefe or my left toe. So today it was a guy who posted repulsive things. What about tomorrow if someone else does a gif they don't like. We all know when you're outed on the internet, you become a target. Sometimes of death threats. Death threats? Two words: PROVE IT. Or it didn't happen. What am I supposed to prove about the death threats? I didn't say they happened here, I said that when you get outed on the internet for something like this, it can result in death threats. What are you supposed to prove about the death threats? Prove they are happening to shitposting trolls like HanAssholeSolo. Because there is proof journalists reporting on HanAssholeSolo ARE receiving death threats.Harmless GIF's, you say? Just boys being racist boys, eh? No harm, no foul, right? Can't you lighten up and take a joke, for chrissakes? CNN is the bad guy here, not the Artist Known As HanAssholeSolo, don't you see? No. And I don't know how you do.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Jul 8, 2017 22:17:42 GMT -5
If idiots are threatening CNN, then how hard is it to imagine that some idiots would also threaten hanassholesolo. (God, I hate that moniker and despise having to type it out.) Anyone these days who gets painted in a negative light on the internet (Deserve or undeserved) is subject to death threats. And it's a little hard to prove that he and/or his family would get those death threats if his real identity was revealed if it still hasn't been revealed. In truth, if they had simply said, 'we tracked the meme to an internet troll named John asshole Doe, I would shrug. If people threatened him or his family, they were being idiots, but the blame would be squarely on him, not CNN. But they said in the article, he better behave or else. That's what I have the problem with. I don't see the gif itself as that big of a deal in a vacuum, but the other things he's said and done are vile. I have no use for him. Whether he believes that crap or he was just saying it to get a rise out of people or a combination of the two, I don't really care. Personally, I think even the reaction to the CNN thing is way overblown. I think they were wrong to put that line in. Period. It's not like I'm all teary eyed, weepy about hanassholesolo and thinking, 'man, that story gets you right here.'
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 12, 2017 17:28:47 GMT -5
So.... CNN should start catering to stupid people? "Less informed about these things" (meaning, people who aren't as plugged into political news as we are) does not in any way imply "stupid." Everyone you ever come into contact with will be more informed on some things than you, and you will be more informed on other things than them. That does not mean that you're both "stupid." Though, I suppose it doesn't necessarily mean the opposite either. "Stupid" was your word. Scroll up a tad.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 12, 2017 19:35:34 GMT -5
If idiots are threatening CNN, then how hard is it to imagine that some idiots would also threaten hanassholesolo. (God, I hate that moniker and despise having to type it out.) The difference is you have to imagine some idiots are threatening an idiot like HanAssholeSolo. You just can't prove it. On the other hand, I have proved journalists are receiving threats from like-minded assholes like HanAssholeSolo. Ball's in your court, Vince. Then you can't prove it and therefore should probably stop losing sleep over it and stop saying this douchbag is receiving threats when you can't prove it. Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of putting up hard fact against vague speculations. Any negative light HanAssholeSolo is painted in is a light he put on himself. You put negative shit out into the universe, you get negative shit back. That's just karma. So what, Vince? Seriously. So fucking what? In light of all the negative blowback CNN has received from other journalistic outlets and those whom simply want to lose their shit over a shitposter having his divine right to be a shitposter scrutinized, this is the most unimportant and meaningless topics to ever come up on this board or any other I've ever participate on. It's all based upon unproven and unverifiable worst-case scenarios and a fuck-ton of handwaving over naked bigotry and handwringing over slippery slopes. It's just a big ol' bag of BULLSHIT. Why is it you guys seem to think it's okay for some nameless non-entity to vent his bigoted spleen as much as he likes, but as soon as someone with a known name and a fixed address calls him out, it's time to break out the fainting couch? That's what you're typing, but from the amount of angst you've expended fretting over poor ol', persecuted HanAssholeSolo, it kinda puts the side-eye to your declaration. You do care and you care a LOT.
|
|