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

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-05-2017, 10:04 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Obama raped our privacy.    As has every progressive president.

I thought the patriot act and allowing ISPs to sell my info was pretty rapey.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-05-2017, 10:44 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Like i said. For your amusement , no.

How about for the reasons Benson already stated, that it is dangerous to do so?

Quote:Idk. I didnt read his other stuff. I thought i read he offered an apology. I didnt ask for it.

As long as you didn't ask for it.

Quote:It is a news agency reporting on who the POTUS is being the messenger for. In certain instances yes i would like to know whose message my president is spreading. In this instance i dont care. But like a lot of things on the news they still report on stuff.

Being a messenger for!?!?  He tweeted a gif.  The intent behind the tweet and the gif, is patently obvious, that Trump "owns" CNN.  The idea that this gif promoted violence against journalists is inane in the extreme, it's a goofy gif and that's the extent of it.  Now, in that same vein, alleging the promotion of violence, where is CNN's outrage over Maxine Waters saying she is going to "Take his ass apart" referring to Ben Carson.  Do I think that's an incitement to violence?  No, I do not, but's a hell of a lot closer to it than a frigging WWE gif.

Quote:I seem to remember hearing about Obamas preacher professors etc. People whose material is used by the president or who have ties to the president often get looked at. I dont think that is anything new. And since we are seeing "modern day presidential"... Well guess what

Except this guy has absolutely zero ties to the POTUS, he's just an internet dude who made a gif poking fun at CNN.  The fact that you don't see the implication of CNN going after him like they did, in the name of reporting the news (miss me with the BS on that one) as a warning to other would be satirists is rather telling.


Let this sink in, a global news network expended considerable time and energy to expose a guy who made a WWE gif.  If it wasn't so insanely depressing it would be farcical to the point of absurdity.

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-05-2017, 11:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How about for the reasons Benson already stated, that it is dangerous to do so?





As long as you didn't ask for it.




Being a messenger for!?!?  He tweeted a gif.  The intent behind the tweet and the gif, is patently obvious, that Trump "owns" CNN.  The idea that this gif promoted violence against journalists is inane in the extreme, it's a goofy gif and that's the extent of it.  Now, in that same vein, alleging the promotion of violence, where is CNN's outrage over Maxine Waters saying she is going to "Take his ass apart" referring to Ben Carson.  Do I think that's an incitement to violence?  No, I do not, but's a hell of a lot closer to it than a frigging WWE gif.



Except this guy has absolutely zero ties to the POTUS, he's just an internet dude who made a gif poking fun at CNN.  The fact that you don't see the implication of CNN going after him like they did, in the name of reporting the news (miss me with the BS on that one) as a warning to other would be satirists is rather telling.


Let this sink in, a global news network expended considerable time and energy to expose a guy who made a WWE gif.  If it wasn't so insanely depressing it would be farcical to the point of absurdity.

A news network followed up on the guy who used their trademarked symbol in a video that was spread by the president and became a national story. Is it really that shocking a news network looked in to it?


I wonder if Trump ever went after anyone that used or slandered his name? 

Funny funny stuff

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-05-2017, 11:51 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: A news network followed up on the guy who used their trademarked symbol in a video that was spread by the president and became a national story. Is it really that shocking a news network looked in to it?

Yes, it absolutely is.  It's a stupid gif.

Quote:I wonder if Trump ever went after anyone that used or slandered his name? 

Funny funny stuff

So you don't mind it when Trump does it either?  When you find the post of mine supporting Trump's attack tweets you'll have the ghost of a point.  I'll wait.

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-06-2017, 12:07 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yes, it absolutely is.  It's a stupid gif.



So you don't mind it when Trump does it either?  When you find the post of mine supporting Trump's attack tweets you'll have the ghost of a point.  I'll wait.

I understand it is a stupid gif. Do you understand it is a stupid gif of a news organizations logo being beaten up by the president that was broadcast to the world by the president who is in self made war with cnn? That means it goes from stupid gif to modern day presidential gif.

I didnt say you supported it. I think it is funny there is a trumpet army out there outraged over a news organization not even releasing a name on the guy whose work the president used to slander their business. When their dear leader is a lawsuit junkie twitter troll.

[Vas Deferens]

(07-05-2017, 08:34 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You are talking to the same group of people who chased a board member down on social media and got him banned.

You talking cargo pants? Cavalcade of insecurities.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-06-2017, 01:52 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I understand it is a stupid gif. Do you understand it is a stupid gif of a news organizations logo being beaten up by the president that was broadcast to the world by the president who is in self made war with cnn? That means it goes from stupid gif to modern day presidential gif.

I didnt say you supported it. I think it is funny there is a trumpet army out there outraged over a news organization not even releasing a name on the guy whose work the president used to slander their business. When their dear leader is a lawsuit junkie twitter troll.

I can see that you really don't get why people find this whole course of action by CNN to be disturbing in the extreme.  The message has been sent, don't mock CNN or they will use their world wide reach and research team to find out who you are.

[GMDino]

Seems some have a real problem with a news agency doing research but not so much with a bunch of people on the internet threatening reporters, their coworkers and their families.

That's interesting.

[StLucieBengal]

(07-06-2017, 10:57 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I can see that you really don't get why people find this whole course of action by CNN to be disturbing in the extreme.  The message has been sent, don't mock CNN or they will use their world wide reach and research team to find out who you are.

What's sad is that he would be upset had Fox News done this to some leftist gif maker. It's a shame when people can't be consistent.

[GMDino]

(07-06-2017, 11:12 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: What's sad  is that he would be upset had Fox News done this to some leftist gif maker.   It's a shame when people can't be consistent.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-06-2017, 11:00 AM)GMDino Wrote: Seems some have a real problem with a news agency doing research but not so much with a bunch of people on the internet threatening reporters, their coworkers and their families.

That's interesting.

I haven't seen anyone in this thread defend or applaud the doxing of CNN employees.  Are you just making this up to try and prove a point?

[GMDino]

(07-06-2017, 11:00 AM)GMDino Wrote: Seems some have a real problem with a news agency doing research but not so much with a bunch of people on the internet threatening reporters, their coworkers and their families.

That's interesting.

(07-06-2017, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I haven't seen anyone in this thread defend or applaud the doxing of CNN employees.  Are you just making this up to try and prove a point?

(07-05-2017, 08:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Those 4chan trolls are not anyone I would want on my tail.  CNN employees are in for onslaughts.

(07-05-2017, 08:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well, good to know you are standing so strongly against them then? 

(07-05-2017, 08:37 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That reporter is a scumbag.   What he did to Justine Sacco was bush league.   Threatened this poor bastard to do the same.

(07-05-2017, 08:39 PM)GMDino Wrote: So, to be clear, you are okay with threats of violence against the reporter, his family AND others at CNN if certain demands are not met by this group.  Because CNN did NOT release the name of a man who posted vile, racist things on the internet.

Excellent. 

(07-05-2017, 08:42 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That reporter deserves all the grief he gets..... he is an A1 scumbag.    

Ofc it goes without saying nonviolent grief.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

I'm going to add this rather than respond to more LEO attacking bait in other threads.

Anonymity on the internet is of the utmost importance. It allows us all to express opinions that may be unpopular with the majority, it allows us freedom of discourse we would never enjoy in person or any other medium. Yes, like everything else on this planet, this will be abused by some. Sometimes this abuse amounts to very painful real life consequences. Like most things we have to take the bad with the good and IMO the good far outweighs the bad. Remember on the old board, we discussed same sex marriage. This was far from an acceptable topic, people like myself, who advocated for it as a civil right were not in the majority. The discussion wasn't always polite, there was certainly some rancor, but by discussing it some attitudes were changed, incrementally to be sure, but they did change. Some opinions hardened in the other direction, so be it. The point is, we were allowed the freedom to discuss a topic freely without fear of real life reprisal.


If you don't think that kind of free expression is worth someone posting racist content or offensive gifs then you've lived in a country in which freedom is taken for granted. This is why the CNN "investigation" is so offensive to me. A multi-billion dollar corporation decided to target a lowly internet dood. This guy might be/probably is a complete asshat, that doesn't change my opinion that what was done to him, and the reasons for doing it, were utterly wrong. The message sent was, "Don't make internet content we don't like or we will dox you". GMDino just asked were the outrage was over 4chan doxing CNN employees. A better question is why is he not holding CNN to a higher standard than 4chan?


Lastly, for consistencies sake, I do hope that everyone railing against anonymity to post offensive internet content will equally demand the end of using "anonymous sources" to publish any news article, ever. After all, you think anonymity is bad, if you said something stand by it right? After all, you needn't fear reprisals of any kind, correct?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-06-2017, 12:22 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Two sides, same coin.  

[StLucieBengal]

(07-06-2017, 12:22 PM)GMDino Wrote:

This reporter is the problem. He did this stuff at buzzfeed. It's a pattern with this guy.

[GMDino]

(07-06-2017, 12:30 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Two sides, same coin.  

So that's an agreement?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-06-2017, 12:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: So that's an agreement?

If that's the kind of "example" you want to hang your hat on, go for it.  As an aside, if it's only one person engaging in the activity you cited, why would you not quote said person instead of making a general accusation?

[GMDino]

(07-06-2017, 12:57 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If that's the kind of "example" you want to hang your hat on, go for it.  As an aside, if it's only one person engaging in the activity you cited, why would you not quote said person instead of making a general accusation?

General statement...not accusation.  Backed up when questioned by a quote saying the reporter deserves all the grief he gets.

And you're welcome!

[NATI BENGALS]

(07-06-2017, 12:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm going to add this rather than respond to more LEO attacking bait in other threads.

Anonymity on the internet is of the utmost importance.  It allows us all to express opinions that may be unpopular with the majority, it allows us freedom of discourse we would never enjoy in person or any other medium.  Yes, like everything else on this planet, this will be abused by some.  Sometimes this abuse amounts to very painful real life consequences.  Like most things we have to take the bad with the good and IMO the good far outweighs the bad.  Remember on the old board, we discussed same sex marriage.  This was far from an acceptable topic, people like myself, who advocated for it as a civil right were not in the majority.  The discussion wasn't always polite, there was certainly some rancor, but by discussing it some attitudes were changed, incrementally to be sure, but they did change.  Some opinions hardened in the other direction, so be it.  The point is, we were allowed the freedom to discuss a topic freely without fear of real life reprisal.


If you don't think that kind of free expression is worth someone posting racist content or offensive gifs then you've lived in a country in which freedom is taken for granted.  This is why the CNN "investigation" is so offensive to me.  A multi-billion dollar corporation decided to target a lowly internet dood.  This guy might be/probably is a complete asshat, that doesn't change my opinion that what was done to him, and the reasons for doing it, were utterly wrong.  The message sent was, "Don't make internet content we don't like or we will dox you".  GMDino just asked were the outrage was over 4chan doxing CNN employees.  A better question is why is he not holding CNN to a higher standard than 4chan?


Lastly, for consistencies sake, I do hope that everyone railing against anonymity to post offensive internet content will equally demand the end of using "anonymous sources" to publish any news article, ever.  After all, you think anonymity is bad, if you said something stand by it right?  After all, you needn't fear reprisals of any kind, correct?

An anonymous source coming forward with information is different than a news organization asking someone for comments about his newfound celebrity for creating a message shared to the world by the president.


I like anonymity. I dont think anybody here said it was bad. 

Really easy concept. If you anonymously break the law law enforcement will attempt to uncover your identity. If you anonymously make headline news. News agencies will attempt to uncover you identity. 

If the gif had stayed on reddit or wherever nobody would have cared. Once spread by the POTUS it got attention and reporters did what reporters do.

And then we get to the real sticky part. All this anger and fury. And dudes name wasnt even released and he remains anonymous because he asked CNN not release it and they obliged.

[Belsnickel]

I am at home because my new laptop is supposed to be delivered today, so I am binge watching Parks & Rec while reading some stuff on energy policy (and taking breaks on here off course), and this moment just seemed appropriate.