CNN goes all in to blackmail Reddit user who made the gif Trump Tweeted.

[6andcounting]

Not only did they publish their threat of blackmail, it's currently the top story on their website.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

"CNN is not publishing "HanAssholeSolo's" 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.

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change."

[BmorePat87]

blackmail would suggest he's paying them. This is just good ole fashioned coercion.

[GMDino]

(07-05-2017, 09:00 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: blackmail would suggest he's paying them. This is just good ole fashioned coercion.

I get a kick out of the Alpha's who post that crap and then tuck and roll when their real identity could be exposed.

Way to stand up for what you believe in!  MAGA 

[BmorePat87]

Though, in CNN's defense, the paragraph prior to the one you posted makes it sound like he was the one who asked them to not reveal his information and they agreed under that condition. Not sure if that's considered coercion.

They should have just exposed the shit bag.

[Au165]

(07-05-2017, 08:53 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Not only did they publish their threat of blackmail, it's currently the top story on their website.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

"CNN is not publishing "HanAssholeSolo's" 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.

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change."

Not blackmail at all. 

[6andcounting]

(07-05-2017, 09:43 AM)Au165 Wrote: Not blackmail at all. 

They are threatening to dox him if he doesn't stand by his apology or makes another CNN meme, correct?

[6andcounting]

(07-05-2017, 09:29 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Though, in CNN's defense, the paragraph prior to the one you posted makes it sound like he was the one who asked them to not reveal his information and they agreed under that condition. Not sure if that's considered coercion.

They should have just exposed the shit bag.

Well of course he asked them not to reveal his identity and they agreed if he met their demands, while reiterating they have the right to still reveal his identity if he makes a meme they don't like. How is that a defense for CNN?

[Au165]

(07-05-2017, 10:24 AM)6andcounting Wrote: They are threatening to dox him if he doesn't stand by his apology or makes another CNN meme, correct?

The guy would have to prove that they initiated such a deal. They called for comment, and he panicked and posted an apology. He called them back and asked they not post his information. CNN had intended to post a story, he offered an apology instead of posting the story. Because he offered the apology as "collateral" against posting their story, he was not coerced meaning they at anytime could still post the identity of the guy.

You can't blackmail yourself. Unless they proposed the deal then it's not blackmail. Based on the guy's comments it sounds like he offered it up to make it all go away.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-05-2017, 10:29 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Well of course he asked them not to reveal his identity and they agreed if he met their demands, while reiterating they have the right to still reveal his identity if he makes a meme they don't like. How is that a defense for CNN?

Did CNN make demands? I can't tell from the article. The guy is quoted as saying he wished to get a reaction to his posts. CNN made his wish come true; he got a reaction.

[BmorePat87]

(07-05-2017, 10:29 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Well of course he asked them not to reveal his identity and they agreed if he met their demands, while reiterating they have the right to still reveal his identity if he makes a meme they don't like. How is that a defense for CNN?

I'm not saying it's not unethical, I'm just asking if it qualifies as coercion if he initiated the deal. 

On a separate note, people are presenting this like all the dude did was post a CNN meme. They were going to expose him for posting a shit ton of vilely racist things. 

[StLucieBengal]

Pretty crazy that a media corporation is threatening using its power to stop a citizen's first amendment rights because it makes them look ridiculous.

CNN is a joke and this petty nonsense is just yet another reason why they can not be taken serious.

And for all those who think this is just fine would you be upset if fox went after some random Reddit poster.

Unethical, ridiculous and petty...... pretty much sums up CNN.

This writer also did the same when he was at buzzfeed

[Au165]

(07-05-2017, 12:40 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Pretty crazy that a media corporation is threatening using its power to stop a citizen's first amendment rights because it makes them look ridiculous.    

The first amendment only covers freedom of speech as it pertains to the government and it's ability to stop it. CNN isn't the government, but still they aren't stopping him from saying it but rather they were going to attach his name to his words.

[GMDino]

(07-05-2017, 12:40 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Pretty crazy that a media corporation is threatening using its power to stop a citizen's first amendment rights because it makes them look ridiculous.    

CNN is not saying he can't say whatever he wants. They said the agreed to HIS terms to not print his name when he apologized for and removed the offensive posts he made.

(07-05-2017, 12:40 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: CNN is a joke and this petty nonsense is just yet another reason why they can not be taken serious.    

Personally I find bringing these guys who are brave behind the keyboard out into the light a good thing. Shame of it is, they run and hide instead of standing by what they said.

(07-05-2017, 12:40 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: And for all those who think this is just fine would you be upset if fox went after some random Reddit poster.  

Not if they posted such filth as the guy did.

(07-05-2017, 12:40 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Unethical, ridiculous and petty......   pretty much sums up CNN.

Also the current administration...but that's for another time.

[6andcounting]

(07-05-2017, 12:05 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I'm not saying it's not unethical, I'm just asking if it qualifies as coercion if he initiated the deal. 

On a separate note, people are presenting this like all the dude did was post a CNN meme. They were going to expose him for posting a shit ton of vilely racist things. 

CNN keeps saying they "tracked" him down. If that's true the Reddit guy didn't initiate anything once CNN contacted him in real life.


because CNN were upset he made a WWE meme about them

[Belsnickel]

(07-05-2017, 12:54 PM)Au165 Wrote: The first amendment only covers freedom of speech as it pertains to the government and it's ability to stop it. CNN isn't the government, but still they aren't stopping him from saying it but rather they were going to attach his name to his words.

This. Also, if you're too chicken shit to sign your name to things like that then maybe you shouldn't be saying it in the first place. If you are too scared to sign your name to inflammatory things then wouldn't that be a very beta move?

[Belsnickel]

(07-05-2017, 01:23 PM)6andcounting Wrote: CNN keeps saying they "tracked" him down. If that's true the Reddit guy didn't initiate anything once CNN contacted him in real life.


because CNN were upset he made a WWE meme about them

Whoa whoa whoa. You can't go crying about a news agency not doing their job, and then when they actually do seek out someone related to a story for comment call it coercion. They sought out the person who made the meme because they were writing a story about it and sought comment. That's how journalism works.

[6andcounting]

(07-05-2017, 11:00 AM)Au165 Wrote: The guy would have to prove that they initiated such a deal. They called for comment, and he panicked and posted an apology. He called them back and asked they not post his information. CNN had intended to post a story, he offered an apology instead of posting the story. Because he offered the apology as "collateral" against posting their story, he was not coerced meaning they at anytime could still post the identity of the guy.

You can't blackmail yourself. Unless they proposed the deal then it's not blackmail. Based on the guy's comments it sounds like he offered it up to make it all go away.

So CNN contacts the guy, says they will reveal his identity, and he says whatever he has can to protect himself. CNN then publicly holds it over his head that they'd be willing to release his identity whenever they'd like. Yeah, sounds like the guy had much of a choice after CNN - in their words - "tracked him down".

[GMDino]

(07-05-2017, 01:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Whoa whoa whoa. You can't go crying about a news agency not doing their job, and then when they actually do seek out someone related to a story for comment call it coercion. They sought out the person who made the meme because they were writing a story about it and sought comment. That's how journalism works.

Matt #CNNBlackmail is a thing on twitter today.

The masses are organized and protecting their own so they don't get called out for their own posts later.

[6andcounting]

(07-05-2017, 01:27 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This. Also, if you're too chicken shit to sign your name to things like that then maybe you shouldn't be saying it in the first place. If you are too scared to sign your name to inflammatory things then wouldn't that be a very beta move?

Yeah, not wanting himself (assumed his gender), his family and friends to get doxed and swatted is such a terrible thing. 

[Belsnickel]

(07-05-2017, 01:35 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Yeah, not wanting himself (assumed his gender), his family and friends to get doxed and swatted is such a terrible thing. 

I stand by my comment. If you're too chicken shit to sign your name to something like that, then maybe you shouldn't be making it.