![]() ![]() They’ve been doing it for years-particularly since Barack Obama won the presidency in November 2008-and it often went unchallenged because the media had convinced itself they simply represented a fringe that could, and should, be ignored. They haven’t just begun thinking and doing the kinds of things that “private citizen” was caught by CNN doing. The creator of that CNN meme is among those the media has been kicking itself for supposedly missing in the run up to Trump’s victory. It’s a dilemma the media has yet to fully grapple with, what to do when the president of the United States mainstreams fringe-level hate. ![]() Not only that, but so much focus on a single, ill-advised line misses a key point: CNN did not name the man, even though he had been trafficking in the kind of ugly, online activity that helped fuel Trump’s campaign and remains at the core of the president’s base of support. Truth be told, the public would be better served if more outlets committed to more frequently unmasking sources who use anonymity agreements to push politically-motivated falsehoods or misleading half-truths into the media’s bloodstream, producing distortions hard to undo by next-day corrections. Most just don’t announce it to the public. ![]() Media outlets throughout the country use that journalistic privilege every day. No matter who made the decision, or why, it was foolhardy. It was ‘lawyer speak’ of the worst kind, maybe an attempt by the network’s legal department to cover its backside, which ended up unfairly delivering a black eye to its own journalists. It was an idiotic line in an otherwise straight-forward investigation. The cable network’s error was spelling out that truth in an article, writing “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change,” which some in the media took as a veiled threat by a large corporation against a private citizen, while others used it to further paint Trump and his supporters as pious victims unfairly attacked by an out-of-control press. (Full disclosure: I do contract work with CNN.com and over the past two years have written several columns for the website.) The First Amendment isn’t the First Amendment if that isn’t true. It’s a foundational principle of our democracy. That’s why media outlets decide, no matter who disagrees. ![]() It would be journalistic malpractice at that point not to name him, even after initially declaring it wouldn’t. Imagine CNN had found out after publication the man wasn’t just another private citizen doing something stupid on the Internet, but instead a conduit for either an influential political organization funded by dark money or was linked to those who helped Russia plant fake news stories during the 2016 election cycle. The network can also reasonably believe, a week from now, the man should be named because more pertinent information about him surfaced. It can reasonably believe it is unnecessary-right now-to name a man at the center of a controversy sparked by President Donald Trump’s tweeting of an image that, depending on one’s perspective, foments violence against the press or is a benign but juvenile act that lowers the dignity of the office Trump holds. CNN’s investigation into the anonymous creator of the wrestling video Trump tweeted drew criticism from some, who viewed it as blackmail or an ethics violationĬNN has the right to change its mind. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |