Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CNN accused of threatening to reveal private citizen’s identity over Trump wrestling video
The Washington times ^ | 7/4/17 | Bradford Richardson

Posted on 07/04/2017 9:39:49 PM PDT by barmag25

CNN has come under fire for suggesting it will publish the identity of a private citizen if he behaves in a way that displeases the network.

(Excerpt) Read more at m.washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Political Humor/Cartoons
KEYWORDS: 4thestate5thcolumn; cnn; cnnblackmail; domesticenemies; fakenews; reddit; searchworks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201 next last
To: Boomer

I said that I do not expect CNN or other news organizations to always act in an ethical manner.

However, publishing a name of a person involved in a news event is perfectly legal.


181 posted on 07/05/2017 7:55:12 AM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

CNN didn’t threaten Clock Boy just because they opposed a video that he made mocking CNN. That’s intended to put a damper on anyone who might make a video or other speech mocking them, if it’s enough of a thorn in their side. If they get away with this, how many people will be hesitant before making speech or other expression mocking CNN? (Unless they have enough celebrity/power to hit back)?


182 posted on 07/05/2017 8:01:02 AM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn. I hate autocorre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

Let them out the boy and his family. They will begin a Sh*tstorm the likes of which they could never predict. That will be legal too, but it won’t help CNN when regular citizens see that while CNN gives the likes of Kathy Griffith a pass, they will bring the full weight of their considerable power against private citizens expressing speech which CNN doesn’t like. I will personally make sure to juxtapose the different ways they treated Griffith and this guy, everywhere I can.


183 posted on 07/05/2017 8:06:12 AM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn. I hate autocorre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

““Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.””

I see noting there about the protection the privacy of a person that decided voice his opinion via an internet meme.


184 posted on 07/05/2017 8:06:32 AM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

However, publishing a name of a person involved in a news event is perfectly legal.


.
Let’s see if the fact pattern in this event passes the Gawker test. Call in Hulk Hogan for a sound bite.


185 posted on 07/05/2017 8:07:17 AM PDT by ptsal ( Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - M. Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

“Let them out the boy and his family. They will begin a Sh*tstorm the likes of which they could never predict.”

And that will be the right of the people to voice their opinion of CNN’s treatment of the person in question.

Again: See First Amendment


186 posted on 07/05/2017 8:08:55 AM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: ptsal

“Let’s see if the fact pattern in this event passes the Gawker test. Call in Hulk Hogan for a sound bite.”

Ping me when CNN releases a sex tape of any person involved in this matter.


187 posted on 07/05/2017 8:10:48 AM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

I didn’t say they couldn’t legally do what they’re doing, but you can’t say they’re not being hypocritical bullies considering the different ways they treated the free speech of a private citizen and the way they treated the free speech of Kathy Griffith. We have every right to call them out for it, and they are being bullies, because at least Griffith is a celebrity. They didn’t have a problem with her free speech and didn’t threaten her. They have a problem with this guy’s free speech amd threatened him. If they get away with it, that means that CNN gets to control “free” speech. They already have a powerful platform to advance their narrative, and now they’re going to try to stifle the free speech of private citizens? It may be legal, but it’s completely unethical, and the rest of us private citizens have to do what we can to oppose it, or CNN controls public speech.


188 posted on 07/05/2017 8:14:04 AM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn. I hate autocorre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

“It may be legal, but it’s completely unethical,...”

I have stated that their process to reveal the person’s name my not be ethical.


189 posted on 07/05/2017 8:16:35 AM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

No, this amendment applies to press writings. Not a Constitutional lawyer here, but this instance seems to be clearly coercion, outside the field of journalism. They can probably print his information if they want. But they don’t have license to blackmail and threaten to use that power.


190 posted on 07/05/2017 8:20:29 AM PDT by ReaganGeneration2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

I can’t believe that you’re defending a powerful entity for using that immense power to intimidate a private citizen into shutting up. Since it’s legal, if you’re correct, does CNN just get to continue to threaten and intimidate people (little people of course, famous people have a little more recourse, though the left uses the power of shunning against famous conservatives) who express things which CNN opposes or resents? That is certainly one way to shut all of us up.


191 posted on 07/05/2017 8:21:29 AM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn. I hate autocorre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

They’re not blackmailed into shutting up and recanting.


192 posted on 07/05/2017 8:23:55 AM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn. I hate autocorre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: ptsal
.


193 posted on 07/05/2017 8:25:19 AM PDT by ptsal ( Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - M. Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

CNN crossed the line when Kaczynski published his statements regarding CNN reserving the right to reveal the person’s identity in the public domain.

Had they simply revealed this person’s identity without the coercive interaction they may have been able to get away with it, but alas, this is CNN. Their balls are bigger than their brains.


194 posted on 07/05/2017 8:27:07 AM PDT by bar sin·is·ter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: kanawa

He wouldn’t be the first to post under a fake personae.


195 posted on 07/05/2017 8:32:18 AM PDT by Raebie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1
Yes, and they pose themselves as the arbiters of the morals and ethics of others, ie, "truth to power". They have no standing, which they've long shown to be true but this was a blatant misuse of their power. They weren't doing this for some greater good, or on behalf of the "little guy"-they were threatening the little guy simply for mocking them. That is a blatant misuse of their power, and if they're not eligible for legal repercussions, then the rest of is "little people" need to make them feel the heat of their misuse of power in any (legal) way that we can. If any lawyer can find a legal angle on behalf of the guy who made the video, wonderful. CNN and should not get to dictate free speech to the rest of us simply because they're powerful, and that's what just happened. The video did not contain anything illegal, CNN just simply didn't like it, and brought their power to bear to stifle it.
196 posted on 07/05/2017 8:32:29 AM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn. I hate autocorre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: timestax
BlackmailGate , yessir it is !
197 posted on 07/05/2017 8:38:17 AM PDT by timestax (American Media = Domestic Enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000
The word is that the guy CNN doxx is 15 years old... a minor

Do I take it this guy, and not Trump, will be responsible for violence against CNN?

198 posted on 07/05/2017 12:39:29 PM PDT by depressed in 06 (60 in '18.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

CNN has no duty to act in a manner that you or I perceive as the greater good.


199 posted on 07/05/2017 2:41:12 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

Then that makes them no better than the political (biased to the left) version of tabloid “journalism”, and they have no standing to claim to speak “truth to power”.


200 posted on 07/05/2017 10:45:00 PM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn. I hate autocorre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson