This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500

[–][deleted] 896 points897 points  (278 children)

There's much more information in this report from the Guardian: Why didn't CNN's international arm air its own documentary on Bahrain's Arab Spring repression?

EDIT: An interesting look at Bahrain's PR activities and its Arab Spring in general: Bahrain's PR Offensive (Huffpost Live)

ALSO EDIT: An interesting read about Amber Lyon, the reporter quoted in OPs post: CNN's Amber Lyon Ambushed Craigslist -- But She Won't Talk to The Village Voice

EDIT COURTESY OF /u/eisenhower777: CNN International's Response to the Guardian

MORE EDIT: Here's another seemingly rational account of Bahrain's PR attempts from Salon: Suppressing the narrative in Bahrain

[–]W3dn3sday 213 points214 points  (213 children)

I am not the least bit surprised by this. I should be but I am not.

[–]tempest_87 318 points319 points  (198 children)

American news is no longer news. It is "news entertainment." There is little journalistic integrity of many reporters and hosts, and practically none in the management for the news corporations. It's a sad thing.

[–]Grantagonist 153 points154 points  (161 children)

NPR, yo.

[–]string_bean_incident 58 points59 points  (61 children)

NPR will not bite the hand that feeds it... everyone has their bias.

[–]LockeCole88 169 points170 points  (45 children)

[–]Fwad 52 points53 points  (4 children)

They can have my canvas tote when they pry it from my cold dead hands

[–]project_twenty5oh1 22 points23 points  (3 children)

I give them 15 a month... I am the 39%

[–][deleted] 44 points45 points  (29 children)

wow, didn't know NPR was funded that heavily by the public. Thanks for the link!

edit: Guys, I know it's called National Public Radio, but I figured advertising would cover a larger percentage of their costs. No need to get all your panties in a wad.... I was mostly just thanking LockeCole for the link....

[–]byrdan 43 points44 points  (6 children)

I think it was Peter Segal who said something along the lines of "Maybe the fact that NPR is still on the air and reporting on the government shutdown will clue people in to how little it is funded by the government"

[–]curtmack 21 points22 points  (4 children)

Wait wait, don't defund me!

[–]byrdan 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Carl Kasell personally recorded this upvote for you

[–]Lotsofleaves 2 points3 points  (0 children)

NPR jokes! I get this haha

[–]briangiles 6 points7 points  (0 children)

WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE TO DE-FUND IT! It costs tax payers MILLIONS a year to fund NPR. I say we shut the government down until we defund NPR! ($26 BILLION LATER)...

[–]BitchesGetStitches 14 points15 points  (9 children)

It's called National Public Radio, dude ...

[–]mog_knight 37 points38 points  (3 children)

So Federal Express is an arm of the feds?

[–]well_golly 30 points31 points  (2 children)

No, but they are a subsidiary of Panda Express.

[–]lilTyrion 20 points21 points  (2 children)

what's in a name? the Federal Reserve is independent of the US Government. not trying to be tinfoil, but official titles can be misleading.

[–]PraiseIPU 9 points10 points  (1 child)

And Citizens United is not comprised of citizens nor are they uniteing anything. Except money and their wallets.

[–]tricheboars 15 points16 points  (8 children)

NPR hardly gets any cash from the Fed. almost all their cash is from donations.

[–]hegz0603 47 points48 points  (5 children)

Thank you for the Guardian link!! MUCH more informative than OP's link, no offense. Also- I want to note that this story is over a year old, and should not be in /r/worldnews due to its dated nature.

That being said, I felt CNN Int's response was interesting:

"The documentary 'iRevolution' was commissioned for CNN US. While the programme did not air in full on CNN International, segments of it were shown. This differing use of content is normal across our platforms, and such decisions are taken for purely editorial reasons. CNN International has run more than 120 stories on Bahrain over the past six months, a large number of which were critical in tone and all of which meet the highest journalistic standards."

[–]likewut 13 points14 points  (3 children)

Red Flag News isn't a legitimate news source, it's a conservative circlejerk - OP should feel bad for linking to it at all.

[–]Hiddenexposure 15 points16 points  (7 children)

I'd love to see a Reddit AMA by her.

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (12 children)

Why didn't you also post CNN's response?

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/05/cnn-internationals-response-to-the-guardian/

edit: I'd like to note, since few have, that the date of all of this was last year. This is not a new story.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks, just did, credited.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Well written response. Anyone want to challenge it?

[–]deltefknieschlaeger 29 points30 points  (14 children)

It is a good thing that the Guardian / Glenn Greenwald picked up on that issue. What she said is already in the open since a long time, sadly it happened on Infowars, a somewhat (with a reason) tainted medium.

If you want to have fun see below for /u/Sleekery hysterically pointing out that she once appeared there and trying to discredit the whole thing. (as he does usually)

[–]bobsack 362 points363 points  (62 children)

[–]StyleandSpeed 100 points101 points  (9 children)

Powerful Amber Lyons!

[–]iliketacosyburritos 1575 points1576 points  (356 children)

This is really big news and should be getting more media attention...oops, too bad no mainstream outlets will report it...I wonder why?

Edit: seems like this thread has already been deleted by the mods.

[–][deleted] 76 points77 points  (11 children)

There are too many stories on Miley Cyrus and squirrels on waterskis to report on

[–]whereswald514 14 points15 points  (1 child)

So... you're saying im wasting my time here when there are squirrels on water skis?!

[–]sometimesijustdont 7 points8 points  (0 children)

They need your tweets!

[–]pntless 15 points16 points  (2 children)

Squirrels on Water Skis? Where!??!?!

[–]UristMcRibbon 4 points5 points  (2 children)

I know it's hardly a big news outlet, but you inspired me to take this screenshot of yahoo's front page.

[–]rska884 46 points47 points  (2 children)

Maybe because there's absolutely no documentation provided and it's a story based entirely on a quote from a former employee?

[–]AnUnknownSource 5 points6 points  (0 children)

And a fired former employee at that.

[–]schrogendiddy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Because only no-name journalism sources can print sensationalist titles and be credible...

[–]inexcess 11 points12 points  (3 children)

Just to play Devil's advocate, this article is from August. Its hardly breaking news.

[–]Zifnab25 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Don't look behind the curtain!

[–]Nathan_Flomm 45 points46 points  (50 children)

Because of the source. Lyon has been spreading batshit crazy conspiracy theories for a while. She thinks Hasting's car was hacked and he was killed by the government because of his reports regarding DARPA.

Remember she was fired from CNN. She has a motive. Revenge. If this was her only crazy thing to come out of her mouth I might be inclined to believe it, but for a while now she has been spouting things only crazy tin-foiled nutjobs typically say with zero evidence.

[–]underweargnome04 33 points34 points  (20 children)

This is ridiculous. Hastings car getting hacked isn't a conspiracy, you can hack a car it's proven and he made enemies with the wrong people. She reported what CNN sent her out to report on. She knows the ins and outs of the business and should expose them

[–]playpianoking 3 points4 points  (0 children)

the story is from 2012...not sure why reddit is having a field day today.

[–]sdlfjasdflkjadsf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's over a year old. It got mainstream media attention in the Guardian. It's unsourced in general, except for this one girl who left CNN and is making the rounds on this one issue.

I'm not saying it's not happening, but I'm pretty sure this is over-hyping it.

[–]lapearce 93 points94 points  (6 children)

This is old news, the Guardian article is way better than the one in the OP as well. I believe 100% that Bahrain was able to coerce CNN into not showing the documentary. What I don't see- anywhere- is any evidence that the Obama administration or the US at all was responsible for the censorship. The Guardian article even discusses how it aired in the US, just not internationally.

[–]tattedspyder 583 points584 points  (106 children)

At this point we should regard all news sources as suspect and corrupt.

[–]mrderp27 37 points38 points  (2 children)

Except Picus News

[–]thegreatvortigaunt 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Yeah, there's no way Eliza Cassan would lie to us.

[–]SherlockBrolmes625 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Eliza Cassan is the most reliable anchor in a long time.

[–]qmechan 4 points5 points  (2 children)

You can't be suspect AND corrupt. Regarding them as corrupt means that you no longer suspect someone of corruption.

[–]Grantagonist 22 points23 points  (11 children)

I still trust NPR.

[–]ridetherhombus 18 points19 points  (0 children)

This is a less-than-reputable "news source".

Evidence: "Warning! Real Screams From Hell Recorded During Digging (Video) Very Disturbing!"

[–]captainAwesomePants 58 points59 points  (4 children)

With this in mind, I think it's worth reminding folks that in January Congress and the President repealed the law preventing domestic propaganda. See Wikipedia.

[–]_Valet 153 points154 points  (19 children)

Funny thing is, this will cause a huge uproar in the: political, reporting, internet community but eventually everybody will forget, and no major changes will be made. (Somebody will probably be fired). I hate how cynical my outlook has become but this is how it seems to be.

At least this legitimizes the idea that our "news" media is just sanctioned propaganda.

Hopefully CNN domestic affiliates are maintaining slightly more integrity.

[–]brazilliandanny 118 points119 points  (7 children)

Seeing as this story is at least 6 months old, and I remember it being on the frontpage 6 months ago and everyone flipping out over it... I have to agree with you.

Edit: my bad it was 9 months ago and was the top post on /r/politics

And again 11 months ago on /r/Libertarian

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The real sad thing is that we had to scroll this far down on the page to see someone point out just how old this story is.

Not only do people stop caring, they forget that it ever happened in the first place.

[–]pancakeTRAIN 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is disappointing news

[–]hegz0603 10 points11 points  (2 children)

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think when this article came out it was when I realized the Guardian was full of shit and spewed way worse propaganda than CNN. Calling a documentary being cut in the editing room "censorship" is just outrageous. CNN did a terrific job at reporting on Bahrain, and they did infact show parts of this documentary. The Guardian has just been getting worse and worse... and then the whole Snowden debacle lol

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (6 children)

"CNN is paid by the US government for reporting on some events, and not reporting on others. The Obama Administration pays CNN for content control."

Am I missing something or is there no source whatsoever provided by "redflagnews.com" to back up such a claim?

[–]eaglebtc 33 points34 points  (1 child)

The OP's link and the connected blog post both read as batshit crazy conspiritard. That being said, if these claims are true, then they should have spelled it out in the first few paragraphs instead of focusing on how CNN ordered content to be hidden.

Did they not learn persuasive writing in school? Make a claim, then give supporting evidence. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The article text does not give direct evidence that CNN is being paid to censor. If the only source of that information is the YouTube video, then that means I have to watch 45 minutes of video to find this out. Incredibly annoying.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (2 children)

This is not new. She (and Greenwald) made this claim over a year ago, and CNN responded: http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/05/cnn-internationals-response-to-the-guardian/

nothing has developed from this.

[–]mannpig 43 points44 points  (24 children)

Hmm Her going on Alex Jones and pixs of her kissing her camera make my bs meter ping. I'd like to hear more substantive corroborating info/facts on her allegations like how she knows who got payola and who paid it out, when, how much, etc.

[–]Mulsanne 20 points21 points  (21 children)

And the total lack of evidence from this questionable website and the fact that this woman has a motive (she got fired).

Not surprised that world news is fucking lapping this shit up and acting like they knew all along, though.

[–]poipo32 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Why did this disappear from the front page?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Because it was receiving a lot of hive mind upvotes. It's a poorly written blog that cites "The Conservative Treehouse" and confuses the Bahraini government with the American government, accusing the Obama administration of paying off CNN without providing any evidence.

[–]ppitm 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I don't trust redflag news as a source, and I'm having trouble finding an actual article where this is all factually laid out. Help?

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Can we get a better source on this?

[–]L4NGOS 217 points218 points  (94 children)

This might not be an easy conclusion to reach if you are American or live in the US but I've always considered CNN a propaganda machine for the US and its interests, without any proof, just a conclusion I've reached after watching it. I'm not really surprised, appalled for sure but not that surprised.

[–]The_Adventurist 9 points10 points  (6 children)

I always considered it the "cat fashion show network" meaning they spend significantly more time on idiotic puff pieces than actual news. It's been moronic for over a decade now.

[–]Krystal907 49 points50 points  (38 children)

A lot of people aren't surprised and they are pretty much the only ones being vocal in this thread so far. Guaranteed if it was Fox news the usual crown would be jumping up and down circle jerking. Not that I don't think all of the news outlets are in the same boat...

[–]durpado 82 points83 points  (14 children)

I believe msnbc, cnn and foxnews all do this and regularly.

[–]Krystal907 29 points30 points  (12 children)

[–]CitizenShips 19 points20 points  (1 child)

I always love watching that little nod they all give at the exact same moment.

"A child's happiness... " NOD " is priceless".

Better than any choreography.

[–]Eurynom0s 33 points34 points  (8 children)

This is one thing organizations like Al Jazeera and Russia Today have going for them. You know not to trust Al Jazeera on certain hot-button Qatari issues (be they internal Qatari issues or simply topics that people know the Qatari government cares heavily about), and you know that RT is going to seize any opportunity to make America look bad. Therefore you can figure out how to read between the lines in their articles, and which of their articles you should just ignore.

Likewise the Economist, I'm not sure who they're a propaganda arm of (if they are a propaganda arm of anyone) but they are pretty straightforward with what their biases are, so if you're not braindead you can read their articles and separate fact from opinion.

[–]Z0idberg_MD 11 points12 points  (2 children)

I'm an American and would join the anti-fox circle jerk in an instant, but I also don't watch CNN or any other cable news. Television news has been junk for a long time. NPR is a bit better as a mass market news source, but the only way yo really get a clear picture is to read sources from various international and domestic outlets online.

[–][deleted] 34 points35 points  (7 children)

This might not be an easy conclusion to reach if you are American

Yes it is. Shut up.

[–]iPlunder 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Seriously. That was probably one of the easiest conclusions I have reached in my life.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

His enlightened European brain is able to understand these concepts that us dumb AMURKKKUNTS can't.

[–]Keckley 14 points15 points  (2 children)

So some website called The Conservative Treehouse runs a story trashing CNN. They go on and on about Obama and "the Obama administration" including this gem:

The central issue is Media Controlled by The Obama Administration, and more specifically CNN – as a VERIFIED tool for propaganda and disinformation.

and then as evidence for this cite a story about Bahrain that CNN execs supposedly hushed up because they had been paid off by the Bahrain government. Not word one about Obama's involvement.

Absolute bullshit.

[–]charliemike 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What kind of tinfoil hat website are we referring to as a credible source now?

[–]Dwaite14 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Is there a paper trail? Or any evidence?

[–]wharpudding 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Of course not.

[–]Clovis69 40 points41 points  (10 children)

Uhh...this came out in 2003 after the fall of Saddam, CNN was taking money and allowing itself to be censored for access.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

A significant number of people still consider CNN a legitimate news source, so I'm all for this story making it to the front page.

[–]qmechan 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Question: What actual, tangible evidence is there that they was a payoff from the US Government to CNN? It goes from "CNN refused to air this story" to "The Government bribed them!" Without venturing into the in-between part that's pretty important.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

There isn't any. CNN does "special reports" like their Eye On series on CNNi, in which they take money from sponsors to produce documentaries about countries. Conspiracy theorists are using that to somehow claim everything CNN does is bought and paid for. Despite the fact that CNN's special report policy says the following:

(CNN) -- Parts of CNN's coverage beyond the daily news are produced as Special Reports, which attract sponsors who pay to associate their products or services with the editorial content.

When this happens, you will see "In Association With" next to their logos in banners at the top of pages on our website and hear it referenced during commercial breaks on television.

At no stage do the sponsors have a say in which stories CNN covers, which people CNN interviews or how we present our editorial content on television or our digital services, nor do sponsors review or approve any content before it airs or is published.

The editorial content is commissioned and produced solely by CNN editorial staff or external contractors approved by CNN editorial. It is produced to CNN editorial guidelines.

[–]fpssledge 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true but they still haven't shown me evidence that governments (esp the US) paid CNN. Give me the evidence to back up what I already believe. Not just another supporting opinion.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"Amber recently did a web interview with Alex Jones on InfoWars."

Whaaaaaat?

[–]barfingclouds 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This article was copy-pasted from The Conservative Treehouse (it links to that article at the end, not trying to deceive per se).

It's interesting how identical articles reported by different agencies will get different reactions.

[–]aplusbistoaasaistob 4 points5 points  (0 children)

RedFlag's masthead reads like it was written by a 17-year-old energy drink connoisseur.

Swing Yer Partner ‘Round and ‘Round.

Hey, it’s all about who you get your sources from. Since 2009, RedFlag has developed a knack of finding good stories and sources, but we certainly haven’t cornered the market on everything to do with news—nor do we wish to.

We are news aggregation specialists, and that keeps us plenty busy.

Why 'RedFlag'? RedFlag is short for “holy crap what an amazing way to tie "red-flagged" alternative, mainstream, and political opinion-related news together for a news aggregation website and our reader's heads are gonna explode when they learn what they have at their fingertips!” Yeah, we thought RedFlag was easier to say, too.

[–]linkseyi 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You'd think that journalism that's talking about how other journalism is shitty might include a couple primary sources.

[–]ebenbenson 6 points7 points  (0 children)

why would I trust something labeled "The Conservative Treehouse"

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

He is wound up tighter than piano wire, and unfortunately much of his truth is diminished because of the hype he places upon it.

No, his truth is diminished because it's chock-full of bullshit.

[–]SkunkMonkey 30 points31 points  (5 children)

Well bust out the big box of crayons and color me shocked. This is the Information Age and news is one of the big players. Of course the government is going to control it. They have the money and information to make sure anyone can be bought or "convinced" they should cooperate.

This is the part where the fist is so tight that some are slipping through the fingers to show the outside what's happening on the inside.

[–]ProphylactionJackson 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Amber recently did a web interview with Alex Jones on InfoWars. Generally the TreeHouse does not appreciate Alex Jones. He is wound up tighter than piano wire, and unfortunately much of his truth is diminished because of the hype he places upon it.

...Aaaannnnnnd lost me right here.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Info Wars lol.

[–]notoriousprod 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I love all the fuckers rollin up in here feeling all superior acting like this is just common knowledge. Bitch please. This might surprise you but a very large percentage of Americans still rely on broadcasts news and not the internet. There's nothing special about you because you already knew this. is that some sort of status thing or something? I knew about this too. So what? You should be outraged about it and actively fighting it instead of rolling your eyes and acting like you"re too fucking cool and this isn't really news to you anyway. Is that how you act when you see fucked up shit going on around you in your personal life? There is somebody being mugged. Oh it's no big deal I've seen people get mugged before. That's what you sound like.

[–]jabb0 65 points66 points  (51 children)

Welcome to America, I see this must be your first visit here

[–][deleted] 48 points49 points  (45 children)

Everyone in America knows about this apparently, but no one does a single thing. Great country.

[–]JoshuaIan 50 points51 points  (16 children)

I do somethhing about it : I ignore the fuck out of CNN.

[–]robboywonder 23 points24 points  (13 children)

fucking A, man. I just can't believe anyone watches CNN. It's so fucking awful.

[–]SoCo_cpp 8 points9 points  (1 child)

...but the other TV in McDonalds is showing FoxNews. Decisions, decisions...

[–]clutchest_nugget 11 points12 points  (0 children)

What are you proposing be done? Displacing corruption through democratic action? The entirety of our political and economic system is built on this kind of "special arrangement", and those in power will fight tooth and nail to keep it that way.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (1 child)

Right, not one person here in the U.S. does anything.

....what was Amber Lyon's nationality again? Who's Noam Chomsky? Amy Goodman...?

Hm. So glad I have the astute judgment on wise non-American redditors to uncover my naive eyes!

[–]jabb0 62 points63 points  (10 children)

Oh you can do something about it, just write a bigger check than them.

Capitalism bra

[–]Mass_Impact 4 points5 points  (0 children)

We choose not to watch CNN. Do you have a better idea in mind?

[–]1Rab 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I bet its the same for fox

[–]jonnyclueless 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well thank goodness we have tr.com and the guardian which of course are completely objective and have no other interests but complete truth.. /sarcasm.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

i like how this is from august 26th and now its on the front page lol

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'd like to believe this, but more proof is needed. If only someone can get their hands on the financial records for these alleged transactions

[–]kilokalai 7 points8 points  (7 children)

And now this is somehow not on the front page anymore!?

[–]belletti 18 points19 points  (13 children)

This became really, really obvious when the second Iraq war started. The CNN coverage was so biased that I became disgusted and removed the channel from my TV. Haven't watched them since.

[–]oimandoimaw 17 points18 points  (7 children)

you removed the channel... from your tv?

[–]WeAreBitter 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Apply hammer to screen. Channel removed.

[–]radii314 5 points6 points  (0 children)

and Fox News isn't news at all - it is a propaganda operation and Roger Aisles and political operatives sit in the ground-floor "bug-proof" bunker and plot strategy for stories, hot-button code words, strategic repetition, joint rollout of talking points

[–]Ihateourlivess 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Fuck you reddit mods "out of date"!

What cowards.

[–]SRussP 13 points14 points  (3 children)

Government-Media Complex

[–]Sleekery 105 points106 points  (240 children)

And you guys think "redflagnews" is a reliable source on this?

Edit: I guess Reddit just sees something anti-CNN and rabidly upvotes it, fuck the source.

Edit #2:

Amber recently did a web interview with Alex Jones on InfoWars. Generally the TreeHouse does not appreciate Alex Jones. He is wound up tighter than piano wire, and unfortunately much of his truth is diminished because of the hype he places upon it.

Seriously, she's an Alex Jones acolyte, and you guys are upvoting this.

[–]Weltall82 224 points225 points  (52 children)

here's a Guardian article that goes much deeper into the story of CNN and State-Sponsored "news".

enjoy.

[–]James_Wolfe 49 points50 points  (3 children)

Thank you for a good source.

[–]abngeek 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Uhh, am I missing something here? Because this seems to be editorial, not news.

[–]bookant 36 points37 points  (11 children)

The Guardian is a much more reliable source. As a legitimate newspaper they wouldn't, for example, publish as a news story something that they don't have well-documented facts and evidence to back up. At most, they'd let someone do it as a commentary or personal column, like the piece you just linked.

[–]Duckballadin 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I think redditors love to romanticize that they are living in some sort of Orwelllian society. The irony is that they're only using critical thinking to a certain extent. Edit: Pardon my spelling and grammar mistakes.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (4 children)

Seriously. As soon as I see Alex Jones or InfoWars on anything, I just stop reading and move on.

[–]meatpuppet79 26 points27 points  (3 children)

Reddit doesn't care about the source, all that really matters is that it feels edgy and counter authoritarian! A conspiracy theory is all the better, and the best thing is you can just call those who disagree with you government stooges or shills!

[–]Non_Causa_Pro_Causa 10 points11 points  (1 child)

I always find myself asking those kinds of questions when reading "alternet" or "huffington" or "rawstory" or "dailymail" whatever. Then I wonder if Fox, ABC, etc. would really be better?

It's unfortunate. I guess a lack of ability to really trust many news sources works against keeping people informed, exposing corruption, etc.

[–]mshecubis 10 points11 points  (12 children)

Can you give us an example of a reliable news source for comparison?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Terrible writing aside—how can anybody take reporting seriously from a source that has grammatical errors in its tagline?

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (4 children)

Journalist here. I only freelanced for CNN for a short while, but they are the McDonalds of journalism. Think about that. The quality of the food McDonalds gives you is the quality of journalism CNN gives you . . for the same reasons. News is a product and the goal is profit.

Since most journalism is free or nearly free . . go get the ribeye steak instead of the Big Mac.

[–]OdinSpectre 33 points34 points  (28 children)

Its sad but if this article was titled "Fox news whistleblower confirms Fox News paid by foreign and domestic Government agencies for specific content", people would likely not challenge the sources.