Can CNN come back from this ?

[Blackened]

The story that was a CNN exclusive was fine. The Buzzfeed story is where there were journalistic problems. And there was no collusion to give one presidential candidate questions ahead of time. There are a lot better, real things you could criticize CNN for.

You think CNN didn't know about this? I suppose it's possible they didn't and just had a bad employee... but how many times do events like this need to keep happening before a person becomes skeptical of the company? After all, she did represent CNN.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ns-to-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.d001f8a76784

More interested in getting a Trump hit piece out than getting the facts. Pathetic.

 

[klnOmega]

Who would have thought. A loud mouthed liberal interrupting everyone else because he thinks he's more important.

I like how he asks a question and then gets an answer, but keeps asking because it isn't the one he wants. Literally a child.

"Mr. Trump can we have a question"
"No"
"Mr. Trump you attacked us can we have a question"
"No"
"Can we have a question? Can we have question"
"No, be quite"
"Can we have a question? Can we have a question, Mr. Trump"

How many times does Trump have to say no? I guess we need all these rape-info posters everywhere because liberals really don't know no means no

 

[Lanx]

hello TheStruggle,

the President elect singling out CNN probably raises its profile, rather than diminishes it.

now CNN is part of the story.

- IGIT

da fuq? they are a news organization, they don't go by the saying

"bad publicity is better than no publicity"

da fuq is wrong with you and your simple-mindedness?

 

[unimackpass]

Did he just fire those guys?

 

[drstrangelov]

Maybe CNN posted more stories and I didn't read them all, but the headline story I read was "Trump briefed on potentially compromising information" or something to that effect. Then the article stated that there was an addendum to an intelligence report stating that there were uncorroborated reports out there that could be damaging if true.

If that's all they reported, there's nothing to complain about, except maybe placing it as breaking or headline news. If there's more, then obviously it's a potentially different story.

 

[Dolomite]

Keep 'em comin', sweets, I got a long drive.

Do me a favor, will you?

Would you mind washing off that perfume before you come back to our table?

 

[IGIT]

Of posting fake news...

hello TheStruggle,

you're missing the point, i think.

when the President Elect singles out an outfit like CNN as his bête noire, it ends up raising CNN's profile...and since so many Americans voted against Mr. Trump, what he's done is essentially say "to the millions of voters there who didn't want me as your POTUS, CNN is where you should tune in for opposition coverage".

those poor folks at MSNBC would have given their right nut for this kind of free publicity.

- IGIT

 

[44nutman]

Trump sound like Mr Mackey from South Park during that press conference.
Hacking is bad, Umkayy.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You think CNN didn't know about this? I suppose it's possible they didn't and just had a bad employee... but how many times do events like this need to keep happening before a person becomes skeptical of the company? After all, she did represent CNN.

One paid pundit helped a friend in the primary. It's not good, but it's not "CNN colluding with a presidential candidate." I mean, come on. Let us be serious. This kind of hysterical, over-the-top reaction to every little story is a big problem with the country.

I'd knock them for their generally superficial coverage of issues, for their laughably making the silly email story the primary focus of their campaign coverage, for having a paid campaigner (Lewandowski) as part of their regular staff, for airing unedited campaign speeches, and for many other problems, but if you read their story on this issue, it holds up fine. I think Buzzfeed's coverage was clearly bad journalism, and hacks that are still trying to push the ridiculous "CNN is against us" narrative are inappropriately trying to tie them together.

Maybe CNN posted more stories and I didn't read them all, but the headline story was "Trump briefed on potentially compromising information" or something to that effect. Then the article stated that there was an addendum to an intelligence report stating that there were uncorroborated reports out there that could be damaging if true.

If that's all they reported, there's nothing to complain about, except maybe placing it as breaking or headline news. If there's more, then obviously it's a potentially different story.

Exactly. And then read what Buzzfeed wrote. It's legitimately bad, so people with an axe to grind are trying to use it to smear good work.

 

[IGIT]

Not when he shut their reporter out big time. He just shed light on them and called them fake news. That's going to stick.

hello there EvilWasLittle,

lol.

CNN got more juice out of Mr. Trump's statement than anything they would have gotten from their reporter's question being answered.

- IGIT

 

[klnOmega]

hello TheStruggle,

the President elect singling out CNN probably raises its profile, rather than diminishes it.

now CNN is part of the story.

- IGIT

If they get press credentials revoked, they are finished.
Also, even liberals will start distancing their self from CNN, simply because it detracts and undermines the credibility of a story. Just like how I won't ever link to Breitbart in a thread I start, because I know the first dozen responses will be "hurr your source is biased" or "fake news", even if the story is verified and being widely reported.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

so saying CNN, whom undeniably helped and supported the Democratic party in this and the last I don't know 5 elections, is against the right makes you a hack?

so if you can open your eyes and simply watch TV/read their internet articles, you're a hack?

the more you know.gif

 

[EvilWasLittle]

hello there EvilWasLittle,

lol.

CNN got more juice out of Mr. Trump's statement than anything they would have gotten from their reporter's question being answered.

- IGIT

They just proved to be a much bigger joke than they already are. Unless they plan on turning into a tabloid/reality tv station, what they just published did not help their cause. People will not go to a source that has been proven to run fake stories when they are looking for actual news.

 

[electricfuneral]

The story that was a CNN exclusive was fine. The Buzzfeed story is where there were journalistic problems. And there was no collusion to give one presidential candidate questions ahead of time. There are a lot better, real things you could criticize CNN for.

Maybe he meant the primaries, Donna Brazille and Hillary Clinton

 

[chardog]

hello TheStruggle,

you're missing the point, i think.

when the President Elect singles out an outfit like CNN as his bête noire, it ends up raising CNN's profile...and since so many Americans voted against Mr. Trump, what he's done is essentially say "to the millions of voters there who didn't want me as your POTUS, CNN is where you should tune in for opposition coverage".

those poor folks at MSNBC would have given their right nut for this kind of free publicity.

- IGIT

that's like saying OJ simpson's murder trial did wonders for his career.....

 

[Jack V Savage]

Maybe he meant the primaries, Donna Brazille and Hillary Clinton

Sure. That's not collusion, and it was one question, right? His claim was hyperbolic to the point of inaccuracy.

 

[steelcity77]

What is Dons approval rating at now, 37%?

fake news .. just like barry's 54% approval rating .. you don't get elected president as an outsider WITH NO POLITICAL EXP and schlong a seasoned politician who had everyone and their mother behind her with a 37% approval rating

 

[WhiskeyPunch]

Haha, someone said "that is inappropriate Mr. President". And it's not inappropriate to run an accusatory fake news story? CNN have lost their marbles.

 

[klnOmega]

Nothing, really. Apparently Buzzfeed fucked up and people are trying to tie it to CNN.

CNN ran the story also. They fucked up.

 

[KONE]

I like how he asks a question and then gets an answer, but keeps asking because it isn't the one he wants. Literally a child.

"Mr. Trump can we have a question"
"No"
"Mr. Trump you attacked us can we have a question"
"No"
"Can we have a question? Can we have question"
"No, be quite"
"Can we have a question? Can we have a question, Mr. Trump"

How many times does Trump have to say no? I guess we need all these rape-info posters everywhere because liberals really don't know no means no

"Mr President-elect that's not appropriate"