Reporters for the paper also cited the CNN photographic editor who resigned after old tweets showing him calling Jews “pigs” and Israel “the main enemy for the people of Egypt.”
The Times claimed that allies of President Donald Trump have compiled a database of past statements and social media posts of journalists.
Arthur Schwartz, the Donald Trump Jr. ally, indicated as much on Twitter after the Times didn’t take action against its editor for the controversial missives that the paper admitted were “a clear violation of our standards.” “If the @nytimes thinks this settles the matter we can expose a few of their other bigots,” he wrote. “Lots more where this came from.”
The White House and Trump campaign said it wasn’t involved in the operation, but suggested that exposing journalists who said things they would report others for is fair game.
“Two can play at this game,” added Sam Nunberg, a former Trump aide. “The media has long targeted Republicans with deep dives into their social media, looking to caricature all conservatives and Trump voters as racists.”
That’s when the reporters wrote that people “using journalistic techniques to target journalists and news organizations as retribution for—or as a warning not to pursue—coverage critical of the president is fundamentally different from the well-established role of the news media in scrutinizing people in positions of power.” It later noted that Media Matters for America has been targeting conservatives for years using the same methods.
A. G. Sulzberger, the publisher of the paper, sent a statement to the reporters complaining about the techniques.
Media critics exploded after the article was published, noting media outlets have been using the techniques not only to scrutinize people in power, but dox Trump supporters and ambush old women at their houses.
Still can't get over the absurdity of major outlets clutching their pearls about the consequences of disclosing public figures' old tweets, as if their stories about "unearthed tweets" were only limited to grave matters of public interest… pic.twitter.com/9uL9KPQ9wW
Outlets have also targeted athletes, activists, and celebrities for social media posts they’ve made when they were teenagers.
“Still can’t get over the absurdity of major outlets clutching their pearls about the consequences of disclosing public figures’ old tweets, as if their stories about ‘unearthed tweets’ were only limited to grave matters of public interest,” wrote James Hasson, an attorney who frequently criticizes the media on Twitter.
There’s more hypocrisy in journalism now than there is in politics.
On today’s show we talk about the anger from liberal journalists about being held to the standards they hold everyone else to. Also, a one-term, backbench former Congressman turned failed radio host is challenging President Trump for the Republican nomination, CNN’s Brain “the human potato” Stelter thinks Trump is mentally unfit for office while Joe Biden continues to show he might not be.
Rather than a serious campaign kick-off with a crowd of supporters, former Congressman Joe Walsh went on “This Week” to announce his candidacy. It was welcome news in liberal newsrooms, while the American people who heard about it had one question on their lips: Who? We have the audio and explain why there was no formal campaign event (he likely couldn’t gather a crowd).
The New York Times is very upset that conservatives are searching social media posts of liberal journalists and digging up past racist/sexist/anti-Semitic/embarrassing things their employees have said. In essence, liberals do not want to be treated the way they’ve treated every conservative, both public and private citizens, for the last decade. We get into all of it.
Brian Stelter, AKA the human potato, had a psychiatrist on his show who thinks calling Donald Trump crazy is an insult to crazy people and the President could be responsible for more deaths and Stalin, Mao, and Hitler. Stelter offered no rebuttal of follow-up question, claiming he wasn’t able to hear the comments. That doesn’t explain why no one who works on the show told him either at the time or during a commercial break.
Stelter also thinks his idea that the President is mentally unfit for office is something the media needs to focus on more. To make his case, he relies on comments from noted Trump haters. Seems Stelter’s “analysis” is as unbiased as his employer’s reporting.
CNN’s Chris Cillizza falsely claimed that ‘NO ONE’ was saying the fake news second Trump/Putin ‘meeting’ was ‘secret.’ It’s so laughably absurd that it is should be an example of how not to do research in journalism classes.
On the same day that Cillizza published his fake news—Wednesday, July 19—two different CNN anchors contradicted his assertion that nobody said the meeting was “secret” live on air on CNN.
Brooke Baldwin, a CNN anchor, twice referred to the meeting as a “secret sitdown” between Trump and Putin—and even at one point asked, “Why didn’t we know about this?”
Another time, Baldwin said live on CNN, “These two presidents, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, did not disclose a second meeting until now.”
Kate Bolduan, another CNN anchor, also repeated the line that it was a “secret” meeting between Trump and Putin.
Bolduan on Wednesday called it a “secret and second sitdown between the president and Russian president Vladimir Putin. Why wasn’t the meeting revealed? What was discussed? And who knows what really was said?”
Also on Wednesday, Bolduan described the meeting a second time live on CNN as “secret.”
The Washington Post also attempted to say an undisclosed meeting was different than a secret meeting. Remember when President Obama said you are grasping at straws if you use the dictionary to define a word’s actual meaning? That depravity is alive and well at Russia Conspiracy Inc.
Ok, just two people at CNN are calling the meeting ‘secret’ though right? Nope.
That’s page one of an internet search on the issue. Whole lot of ‘secret’ for no one calling it secret … specifically anyway.
