On Friday, CNN embarrassed themselves again with a Trump story designed to reinforce all the “collusion” narrative on the Left, the cable net said the following:
A CNN spokeswoman says there will not be disciplinary action in this case because, unlike with Brian Ross/ABC, @MKRaju followed the editorial standards process. Multiple sources provided him with incorrect info.
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) December 8, 2017
Is that so?
https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/939247260956872704
https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/939247380045672448
The sources were likely trying to use him. CNN needs to think about identifying them. It would serve all of us if sources realize they can’t hide behind anonymity in order to peddle false info. https://t.co/6GDrNUR2WH
— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) December 8, 2017
And how many times have these “sources” been used previously?
https://twitter.com/omriceren/status/939279047984590848
How did multiple sources all mis-read the date and radically misinterpret the document in the same way? What's the rationale for continuing to conceal the identity of these sources who caused so much damage and deceit on the public with their false claims? https://t.co/dixMWJ5OHv
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) December 8, 2017
*Multiple* intel committee Dems! https://t.co/UumtWOu1Xh
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) December 8, 2017
https://twitter.com/NoahPollak/status/939285454481866752
Time to out the sources – the public deserves transparency with errors like this and lying sources deserve the transparency. https://t.co/cTuR74Sxfj
— Josh Jordan (@NumbersMuncher) December 8, 2017
Recommended
This is the point, I would think, at which you burn your sources. https://t.co/GiMNRxE2zn
— The Nats Won The World Series (@EsotericCD) December 8, 2017
https://twitter.com/ArthurSchwartz/status/939296370372038656
https://twitter.com/GenAugustoP/status/939268143893155840
Shameless
Not that you had any credibility to lose, but… https://t.co/D20WF27uhi
— Jim Hanson (@JimHansonDC) December 8, 2017
You've just completely surrendered the ability to defend any story you do based upon unnamed sources. Surely someone there understands that? https://t.co/eEgaDVLL35
— DanRiehl (@DanRiehl) December 9, 2017
"Reliable sources" https://t.co/P6ABuMwnTT
— Carl Gustav (@CaptYonah) December 8, 2017
if the sources lied to him, he must out the sources.
— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) December 8, 2017
You know the old journalism adage: "If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out. But if House Democrat reads you a Don Jr. email over the phone, publish publish publish." https://t.co/3HbFMVaHL0
— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) December 8, 2017
This is why anonymous sources can be a problem: because without attribution, the reporter assumes responsibility for the information presented. And while reporters may feel an obligation to protect their anonymous sources, that feeling seldom goes both ways. https://t.co/dPxI5IUJhA
— Sarah Westwood (@sarahcwestwood) December 8, 2017
“My sources duped me” is a hell of an excuse regarding information that literally anyone with an internet connection could have verified https://t.co/rqX5OF1Dkd
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) December 8, 2017
Right!?
Donald Trump Jr., the focus of CNN’s original incorrect report, had a humble suggestion along with a comment about any lack of disciplinary action:
Maybe try reaching out to someone other than the liberals in the room who run to you breaking their agreed upon confidentiality to create their narrative and maybe you will get facts… Otherwise you nailed it. #fakenews https://t.co/bZBjqCEW0p
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) December 8, 2017
Does anyone think for one second that there would be no action if someone at CNN did something so flagrantly wrong to a Democrat? #witchhunt https://t.co/bZBjqCEW0p
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) December 9, 2017
What are the odds that CNN would actually do something as egregious to a Dem?
Update:
CNN’s Brian Stelter later added this:
I'm seeing lots of tweets saying CNN should out the sources that misinformed @MKRaju. But @CNNPR says the network does not believe that the sources *intended* to deceive… https://t.co/wKl9rX7Ibc
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) December 9, 2017