Regardless of how you feel about Fox News, you have to respect this

[Rotobeast]

I'm surprised this hadn't been posted earlier.
Maybe there's hope for mainstream journalism.
Maybe Trump will unite them, by demonizing them ?

http://www.businessinsider.com/shep-smith-defends-cnn-russia-report-2017-1

Quote:Fox News host Shep Smith defends CNN in monologue: No journalist 'should be subjected to belittling' by president-elect







Maxwell Tani

 


Jan. 11, 2017, 5:35 PM
67,779



 facebook


 linkedin


 twitter










Fox News anchor Shep Smith on Wednesday defended CNN after President-elect Donald Trump belittled one of the network's journalists at a press conference over a controversial report.

"President-elect Trump today told CNN's Jim Acosta that his organization amounts to fake news," Smith said.

Smith referred to CNN's Tuesday report that top intelligence officials presented Trump with information that Russian operatives claimed they possessed compromising information about him. The information presented to Trump, CNN reported, was based on a 35-page dossier which BuzzFeed later published in full on its website.

"CNN's exclusive reporting on the Russian matter was separate and distinctly different from the document dump executed by an online news property," the Fox News journalist said.





"Though we at FOX News cannot confirm CNN's report," Smith continued, "it is our observation that its correspondents followed journalistic standards and that neither they nor any other journalists should be subjected to belittling and delegitimizing by the president-elect of the United States."





For its part, CNN defended its own coverage in a statement on Thursday, distancing itself from BuzzFeed.

"CNN's decision to publish carefully sourced reporting about the operations of our government is vastly different than BuzzFeed's decision to publish unsubstantiated memos," said a statement from the network. "The Trump team knows this. They are using BuzzFeed's decision to deflect from CNN's reporting, which has been matched by the other major news organizations."

The statement continued: "We made it clear that we were not publishing any of the details of the 35-page document because we have not corroborated the report's allegations," the statement continued. "Given that members of the Trump transition team have so vocally criticized our reporting, we encourage them to identify, specifically, what they believe to be inaccurate."

In a statement shared with its employees, BuzzFeed defended its decision to release the memo despite hesitation by other media outlets to publish the unverified claims.

"We stand with Ben on his decision to publish this newsworthy document, which was reported on by multiple news outlets and seen by high-level government officials including the president and president-elect," cofounder and CEO Jonah Peretti wrote referring to Ben Smith, BuzzFeed's editor in chief.

"As a result of this decision, we were criticized by the incoming administration," Peretti continued. "We are not going to respond to these divisive comments, which put us in great company by the way — The New York Times, CNN, and The Washington Post have all been attacked. So has Meryl Streep and the cast of Hamilton, but we'd never compare ourselves to people that talented."

"We are going to keep doing what we do best, which is deliver impactful journalism," the BuzzFeed cofounder concluded.

[Benton]

maybe there is some hope for.fox. As I've said before, their news reporting is usallu some of the best. Its usually the commentary where they run afoul of news. My main criticism is they don't try to differentiate the two.

[GMDino]

Smith is one of the most fair on that station...which is why he does actual news early in the afternoon and doesn't have a prime time, stir the pot spot in the lineup.

[BmorePat87]

Shep has always been a great journalist.

[Belsnickel]

(01-13-2017, 01:24 AM)Benton Wrote: maybe there is some hope for.fox. As I've said before, their news reporting is usallu some of the best. Its usually the commentary where they run afoul of news. My main criticism is they don't try to differentiate the two.

It's one of the problems with all of the 24-hour news networks, to be honest. There is a big muddying of the waters because of the constant news-cycle.

[6andcounting]

"We are going to keep doing what we do best, which is deliver impactful journalism," the BuzzFeed cofounder concluded.

[6andcounting]

(01-13-2017, 09:34 AM)GMDino Wrote: Smith is one of the most fair on that station...which is why he does actual news early in the afternoon and doesn't have a prime time, stir the pot spot in the lineup.

Yeah, just like when Glenn beck had that afternoon spot on Fox a while back. 

[GMDino]

(01-13-2017, 11:14 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Yeah, just like when Glenn beck had that afternoon spot on Fox a while back. 

Beck, between his morning show gig and when he lost his mind was one of the best on radio.  I can't attest to his television show other than it seemed to be then that he started buying all the conspiracy theories and looking crazy.

His radio show back in the day was funny and informative.

[Mike M (the other one)]

There was no belittling, and I guess honesty hurts being called fake news when you run with a fake story and get caught red handed.
Scott wouldn't shut up, he was constantly interrupting both Trump and the other reporters who wanted to ask questions. Trump had to tell him repeatedly to be quiet. If Scott had an issue, he should've taken it up with the Trump Team after the Press Conference instead of embarrassing himself.

[GMDino]

(01-13-2017, 12:22 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: There was no belittling, and I guess honesty hurts being called fake news when you run with a fake story and get caught red handed.
Scott wouldn't shut up, he was constantly interrupting both Trump and the other reporters who wanted to ask questions. Trump had to tell him repeatedly to be quiet. If Scott had an issue, he should've taken it up with the Trump Team after the Press Conference instead of embarrassing himself.

That you, and the POTUS, and the right wing noise machine, insist that CNN "ran with a fake story" shows that none of you saw what CNN reported.

That the POTUS shouted down a reporter and demeaned his entire organization over one story (that he is misinterpreting) then took a question from Breitbart is more telling than any issue you think the reporter has.

[Belsnickel]

(01-13-2017, 12:26 PM)GMDino Wrote: That you, and the POTUS, and the right wing noise machine, insist that CNN "ran with a fake story" shows that none of you saw what CNN reported.

Yeah, that is what bothers me. CNN's story was not fake news as far as anyone can tell. The only thing disputing their story was NBC had one source tell them that the PEOTUS was not verbally briefed on the information that CNN had reported was in the briefing, though it was confirmed the summary was a part of the documents. This is part of the problem we are seeing is that people often haven't developed the critical thinking skills necessary to really analyze these sorts of things, and so they parrot what their echo chamber wants them to say about it.

And, if anyone has further information on this, please let me know. I haven't been following all of the updates to it, but that was the last that I had heard about it all.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-13-2017, 12:55 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, that is what bothers me. CNN's story was not fake news as far as anyone can tell. The only thing disputing their story was NBC had one source tell them that the PEOTUS was not verbally briefed on the information that CNN had reported was in the briefing, though it was confirmed the summary was a part of the documents. This is part of the problem we are seeing is that people often haven't developed the critical thinking skills necessary to really analyze these sorts of things, and so they parrot what their echo chamber wants them to say about it.

And, if anyone has further information on this, please let me know. I haven't been following all of the updates to it, but that was the last that I had heard about it all.

My understanding is that this "report" has been circulating for months and no one would go near it because it couldn't be substantiated and was highly inflammatory.  My biggest issue with it is the same issue I've had with journalism for some time, they kill you on page one and apologize for being wrong on page 60.  The allegations in this "report" are so damaging that reporting them when they can't be substantiated is highly irresponsible and, IMO, shows a lack of journalistic standards and ethics.  This is especially problematic when you consider how significant segments of our population already consider main stream journalism to be heavily biased against the right.  This incident will only reinforce that perception, in spades.

[*PhilHos*]

Look at that, Trump is already uniting the country!

[*bfine32*]

Trump has proven thus far to be the Great Uniter. 180 from the Great Divider.

[GMDino]

(01-13-2017, 12:55 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, that is what bothers me. CNN's story was not fake news as far as anyone can tell. The only thing disputing their story was NBC had one source tell them that the PEOTUS was not verbally briefed on the information that CNN had reported was in the briefing, though it was confirmed the summary was a part of the documents. This is part of the problem we are seeing is that people often haven't developed the critical thinking skills necessary to really analyze these sorts of things, and so they parrot what their echo chamber wants them to say about it.

And, if anyone has further information on this, please let me know. I haven't been following all of the updates to it, but that was the last that I had heard about it all.

Pretty much got it.  They said there's this thing out there that some people have looked at, it's unsubstantiated and Trump and Obama have both been told about it and it is now being released by Buzzfeed even without proof.

Pretty straight forward.

But Trump says he wasn't told then he says he was told it was all fake.  Both of those things were refuted by US Intelligence.  Publically. 

Trump will spin it to make ALL news from CNN to be "fake".  Then there will be another network and another and another....

First step to any good revolution is to control the media.

[BengalHawk62]

(01-13-2017, 01:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Pretty much got it.  They said there's this thing out there that some people have looked at, it's unsubstantiated and Trump and Obama have both been told about it and it is now being released by Buzzfeed even without proof.

Pretty straight forward.

But Trump says he wasn't told then he says he was told it was all fake.  Both of those things were refuted by US Intelligence.  Publically. 

Trump will spin it to make ALL news from CNN to be "fake".  Then there will be another network and another and another....

First step to any good revolution is to control the media.

The first step to any good fascist state is to control the media........

[Mike M (the other one)]

(01-13-2017, 12:26 PM)GMDino Wrote: That you, and the POTUS, and the right wing noise machine, insist that CNN "ran with a fake story" shows that none of you saw what CNN reported.

That the POTUS shouted down a reporter and demeaned his entire organization over one story (that he is misinterpreting) then took a question from Breitbart is more telling than any issue you think the reporter has.

*sighs

Doesn't matter, the information is dis-information. How many other news viable news agencies ran with it?
NONE.


Why doesn't someone publish the Clinton Foundation disinformation report?

[GMDino]

(01-13-2017, 02:02 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: *sighs

Doesn't matter, the information is dis-information. How many other news viable news agencies ran with it?
NONE.


Why doesn't someone publish the Clinton Foundation disinformation report?

The information is just that...information.

And it was presented as something that was not yet verified but that had been presented to both Obama and Trump.

That Trump lied about knowing about it and lied about being told it was all fake is more of an issue.

That people are focusing on his urine fetish (alleged) instead of the financial blackmail the Russians have (allegedly) is also a bigger issue.

I'm not sure which Clinton Foundation disinformation report you refer to, but I still have friends that insist the Clinton Foundation was found to be dirty rather tahn the Trump Foundation which admitted illegal activity.

[Belsnickel]

(01-13-2017, 02:02 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: *sighs

Doesn't matter, the information is dis-information. How many other news viable news agencies ran with it?
NONE.

WSJ, NYT. Two ideologically opposite newspapers.

[Belsnickel]

(01-13-2017, 01:06 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: My understanding is that this "report" has been circulating for months and no one would go near it because it couldn't be substantiated and was highly inflammatory.  My biggest issue with it is the same issue I've had with journalism for some time, they kill you on page one and apologize for being wrong on page 60.  The allegations in this "report" are so damaging that reporting them when they can't be substantiated is highly irresponsible and, IMO, shows a lack of journalistic standards and ethics.  This is especially problematic when you consider how significant segments of our population already consider main stream journalism to be heavily biased against the right.  This incident will only reinforce that perception, in spades.

CNN didn't report on what was in it. They said there was information in the briefing about information Russia claims to have on Trump that could be damaging. Buzz Feed published the information, not CNN. This is part of the problem is that people are conflating these two reports, but they are not the same. One is a news agency, the other is a website that some people look to for news but shouldn't.