{"id":77233,"date":"2017-07-08T16:36:55","date_gmt":"2017-07-08T20:36:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/?p=77233"},"modified":"2017-07-08T18:15:05","modified_gmt":"2017-07-08T22:15:05","slug":"cnn-warns-it-may-expose-an-anonymous-critic-if-he-ever-again-publishes-bad-content","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/?p=77233","title":{"rendered":"CNN Warns It May Expose an Anonymous Critic if He Ever Again Publishes Bad Content"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Glenn Greenwald
\nThe Intercept<\/p>\n

(updated below)<\/strong><\/p>\n

A CONTROVERSY ERUPTED<\/u>\u00a0late Tuesday night\u00a0after CNN\u00a0published an article<\/a>\u00a0announcing that it had uncovered the identity of the anonymous Reddit user who created the video of President Donald Trump punching a CNN logo. CNN and other outlets had previously reported that this user, who uses a pseudonym, had also posted anti-Semitic and racist content on Reddit, including an image identifying all of the Jewish employees of CNN, designated with a Jewish star next to their photos.<\/p>\n

Though CNN decided \u2014 for now \u2014 not to reveal his name, the network made clear that this discretion was predicated on the user\u2019s\u00a0lengthy public apology<\/a>, his\u00a0promise not to repeat the behavior, and his status as a private citizen. But in its article, the network\u00a0explicitly threatened that it\u00a0could\u00a0change its\u00a0mind about withholding the user\u2019s real name if his\u00a0behavior changes in the future:<\/p>\n

\nCNN is not publishing \u201cHanA**holeSolo\u2019s\u201d name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.<\/p>\n

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Several of the objections made to CNN\u2019s conduct here appear to be false. That includes the\u00a0claim by<\/a>\u00a0the president\u2019s son Donald Trump Jr. that the user threatened by CNN is 15 years old (the CNN reporter, Andrew Kaczynski,\u00a0said<\/a>\u00a0the Reddit user is an adult). The claim that CNN \u201cblackmailed\u201d the user into apologizing \u2014 expressed by a Twitter hashtag, #CNNBlackmail, that still sits at the top of trending topics on the site \u2014 seems dubious at best, since there is no evidence the user spoke to CNN before posting his apology (though CNN itself says it contacted the user\u00a0the day\u00a0before<\/em>\u00a0he posted his apology, which presumably means he knew CNN had found out his name when he posted it).<\/p>\n

But the invalidity of those particular accusations does not exonerate CNN. There is something self-evidently creepy, bullying, and heavy-handed about a large news organization publicly announcing that it will expose someone\u2019s identity if he ever again publishes content on the internet that the network deems inappropriate or objectionable. Whether it was CNN\u2019s intent or not, the\u00a0article makes it appear as if CNN will be monitoring this citizen\u2019s online writing, and will punish him with exposure if he writes something the network\u00a0dislikes.<\/p>\n

There is also something untoward about the fact that CNN \u2014 the subject of the original video \u2014 was the news outlet that uncovered his identity. That fact creates the appearance of vengeance: If you, even as a random and anonymous internet user, post content critical of CNN, then it will use its vast corporate resources to investigate you, uncover your identity, and threaten to expose you if you\u00a0ever do so again.<\/p>\n

The reality here is likely more complicated. The most offensive passage here \u2014 \u201cCNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change\u201d \u2014 sounds like classic lawyer language that executives or corporate lawyers would demand be included.\u00a0It does not sound like something a typical journalist would write on\u00a0their\u00a0own. (CNN did not respond to The Intercept\u2019s inquiries about who inserted this language or what future behavior on the part of the user might trigger CNN\u2019s\u00a0threat to expose him; we will update this article if any response is received.)<\/p>\n

And CNN\u2019s role in discovering this user\u2019s identity is likely more a byproduct of\u00a0Kaczynski\u2019s well-established internet-sleuthing skills than a corporate decision to target a critic. Indeed, the decision to withhold the person\u2019s name \u2014 had it been made without the threat to expose it in the future \u2014 could arguably be heralded as a commendable case of journalistic restraint.<\/p>\n

In response to the controversy last night,\u00a0Kaczynski argued<\/a>\u00a0that \u201cthis line is being misinterpreted. It was intended only to mean we made no agreement [with] the man about his identity.\u201d That may have been CNN\u2019s intent, but that is not what the sentence says.<\/p>\n

Whatever the intent, this is a case where one of the nation\u2019s most powerful media corporations is explicitly threatening a critic with exposure should he publish material that\u00a0the network deems \u2014 based on its own secret standards \u2014 to be worthy of punishment. And the threat comes in the wake of his\u00a0groveling public apology, posted less than a day after he learned CNN had discovered his identity.<\/p>\n

There is also a real question about whether a news organization \u2014 when deciding what information is newsworthy \u2014 should take into account factors such as whether someone is remorseful for what they said and whether they promise not to express similar views in the future. Those considerations seem to be\u00a0the province of those\u00a0vested with the power\u00a0to punish bad behavior \u2014 a parent, a police officer, or a judge \u2014 rather than a news outlet. All of this has a strong whiff of CNN deciding who is a good boy and who is a bad boy based on the content of their views, and doling out journalistic punishments and rewards accordingly.<\/p>\n

Moreover, if this person\u2019s name is newsworthy \u2014 on the ground that racists or others who post inflammatory content should be publicly exposed and vilified \u2014 does it matter if he expressed what CNN executives regard as sufficient remorse? And if his name is not newsworthy, then why should CNN be threatening to reveal it in the event that he makes future utterances that\u00a0the network dislikes?<\/p>\n

If you\u2019re someone who believes that media corporations should expose the identity even of random, anonymous internet users who express anti-Semitic or racist views, then you should be prepared to identify the full list of views that merit similar treatment. Should anyone who supports Trump have their identity exposed? Those who oppose marriage equality? Those with views deemed sexist? Those who advocate communism? Are you comfortable with having corporate media executives decide which views merit public exposure?<\/p>\n

Whatever else is true, CNN is a massive media corporation that is owned by an even larger corporation. It has virtually unlimited resources. We should cheer when those resources are brought to bear to investigate those who\u00a0exercise great political and economic power. But when they are\u00a0used to threaten and punish a random, obscure citizen who has criticized the network \u2014 no matter how objectionable his views might be \u2014 it resembles corporate bullying and creepy censorship more than actual journalism.<\/p>\n

UPDATE<\/strong>: CNN just\u00a0issued a statement<\/a>\u00a0in response to the controversy its article provoked:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n

All of these claims are already included in this article, but note two key points: 1) While the Reddit user\u2019s apology was posted before he spoke to any CNN reporter, he posted it\u00a0after<\/em>\u00a0he was contacted by CNN, which means he knew when he publicly apologized that the network had unearthed his identity; and, more importantly, 2) CNN\u2019s claim that it merely meant to convey \u201cthat there was no deal\u201d is squarely at odds with what its article actually warned: \u201cCNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.\u201d<\/p>\n

That sentence \u2014 which can only be read as a threat to reveal his name should he post more offending material in the future \u2014 is what has triggered the anger at CNN, and\u00a0the network\u2019s statement does not address that at all. Finally, CNN apparently refuses to say whether this threatening language was included by its reporter (who has borne the brunt of the public anger) or by its lawyers and executives demanding that it be included.<\/p>\n

___
\nhttp:\/\/theintercept.com\/2017\/07\/05\/cnn-anonymous-critic-trump-wrestling-gif-reddit-user\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-77233","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77233","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=77233"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77233\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=77233"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=77233"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=77233"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}