News CNN caught staging Muslim protest.

[Black Sun]

This is blowing up all over the internet. For the young minds here that watch the mainstream media: don't believe everything you see.



https://twitter.com/markantro/status/871419204846669825

 

[Windsock]

FAKE NEWS

BROUGHT TO YOU BY CLINTON NEWS NETWORK, LISTEN AND BELIEVE!

 

[Omnimon]

I don't what to say...I'm shocked .... did some quick digging and :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becky_Anderson

So it really is the same person ....

and then saw this :



So ...words can't really express what needs to be said here ..... Just surprised that they'd stoop to those kind of levels.... instead of just reporting the news they'll manufacture the news now ?

Seems like they're desperate for $$ so this would bring additional profit margins for them as they'll milk the tragedy for what its worth .

After all, money / profits > Truth ...... and i thought i was cynical before o.o .

 

[Axel The Englishman]

Well roast my chicken and butter my toast.

 

[daesung]

CNN needs to just give up. :0

 

[Black Sun]

Make sure to share this with your friends and family.

 

[Truthblade]

What, people still watch the Clinton News Network?

I guess they do make the news.

 

[Lycanthrosis]

I'm not sure if anyone is interested in maybe cross-referencing some other sources here.. but uh..

http://www.snopes.com/cnn-muslim-protests-london/

The idea that this was staged seems to be just a rumor that has been spread by right-wing pundits.
There doesn't appear to be any real evidence to back up the claim that this was staged by CNN.
There does, however, appear to be evidence backing up the claim that this is a legitimate group of protesters who were let through by police and arranged by CNN staff to be in the shot behind the reporter. Which isn't an uncommon thing to do apparently.

 

[Black Sun]

I'm not sure if anyone is interested in maybe cross-referencing some other sources here.. but uh..

http://www.snopes.com/cnn-muslim-protests-london/

The idea that this was staged seems to be just a rumor that has been spread by right-wing pundits.
There doesn't appear to be any real evidence to back up the claim that this was staged by CNN.
There does, however, appear to be evidence backing up the claim that this is a legitimate group of protesters who were let through by police and arranged by CNN staff to be in the shot behind the reporter. Which isn't an uncommon thing to do apparently.

Snopes is a left-wing 'fact checker'. Their evidence for this being false is quite weak, using statements form CNN themselves. Of course CNN is going to deny it. This is not the first time CNN have been caught heavily manipulating the truth. "Fake News" are rarely a 100% fabricated, but rather twisted versions of reality that pushes a political agenda. The left always shout right-wing conspiracy when something doesn't go their way. The fact that this 'fact checker', when investigating something, asks the perpetrator if it is true is just laughable. "Osama, did you bomb 9/11?" Osama told us: "lol, no." Snopes: "Okay, fake news you guys! He didn't do it!"

 

[Lycanthrosis]

Snopes is a left-wing 'fact checker'. Their evidence for this being false is quite weak, using statements form CNN themselves. Of course CNN is going to deny it. This is not the first time CNN have been caught heavily manipulating the truth. "Fake News" are rarely a 100% fabricated, but rather twisted versions of reality that pushes a political agenda. The left always shout right-wing conspiracy when something doesn't go their way. The fact that this 'fact checker', when investigating something, asks the perpetrator if it is true is just laughable. "Osama, did you bomb 9/11?" Osama told us: "lol, no." Snopes: "Okay, fake news you guys! He didn't do it!"

Oh, you didn't read the entire article, huh? Alrighty.

 

[Black Sun]

Oh, you didn't read the entire article, huh? Alrighty.

 

[FTR]

I think the bigger problem that people are missing is that whether the "mothers" were paid actors or genuine protestors is kind of besides the point.
Does no one see the dilemma with setting a stage for news (which is supposed to be completely and totally unbiased) in order to convey a certain message and incite a certain reaction is inherently wrong to do?
Perception IS reality, context IS truth. If you manipulate that then what's stopping them from blatant lying and withholding?
It's not just CNN, it's all of those psychopaths in the media. No one questions for the sake of questioning anymore, they just scrutinize those who oppose them and blindly follow those who align with them. It's that Us vs Them mentality which gives groups like this an avenue to pull this kind of stuff and do it confidently.
The very fact different networks can be labeled left or right leaning is terrifying. Skewed news is not news, it's propaganda.

 

[Lycanthrosis]

Dank meme, bro. I honestly don't know what I expected. Lol

I think the bigger problem that people are missing is that whether the "mothers" were paid actors or genuine protestors is kind of besides the point.
Does no one see the dilemma with setting a stage for news (which is supposed to be completely and totally unbiased) in order to convey a certain message and incite a certain reaction is inherently wrong to do?
Perception IS reality, context IS truth. If you manipulate that then what's stopping them from blatant lying and withholding?
It's not just CNN, it's all of those psychopaths in the media. No one questions for the sake of questioning anymore, they just scrutinize those who oppose them and blindly follow those who align with them. It's that Us vs Them mentality which gives groups like this an avenue to pull this kind of stuff and do it confidently.
The very fact different networks can be labeled left or right leaning is terrifying. Skewed news is not news, it's propaganda.

How is directing people to stand in certain spots inherently wrong?
I agree that maybe it could be a questionable tactic, but in this case it isn't really. How is it even harmful?
If this group of people are genuine protesters, what is wrong with showing them?

 

[FTR]

Dank meme, bro. I honestly don't know what I expected. Lol

How is directing people to stand in certain spots inherently wrong?
I agree that maybe it could be a questionable tactic, but in this case it isn't really. How is it even harmful?
If this group of people are genuine protesters, what is wrong with showing them?

The if part

 

[Lycanthrosis]

The if part

Honey, what you doin...
We've already established that in a hypothetical situation where you guys actually believe they are legitimate protesters, what is wrong with them being put into the shot?

 

[FTR]

Very little, inherently.
But that's the case with everything that seems harmless on the surface. Everything changes when you introduce the notion of underlying motives.
The problem, I guess, really doesn't truly lie in the act but the fact the act could even be misconstrued at all.

 

[Hall Kervean]

The problem is that the news is supposed to be recorded "in the act."
i.e. the reporters are there to report, not interfere.
By arranging protestors into a shot, they're not recording it in the act, they're messing with the event.

The fact that they're willing to do that is what is being brought to light.
I personally have no idea if the protest itself was fake or not, but I'll have you know that while people in the news do sometimes have things arranged in a shot, it's never rarely like it was real.
i.e. many interviews with a child sitting on a haystack are arranged, and they don't act like it's not.
But when they ask which police officers are in the back (the white ones were leaving the shot as they brought asian officers in), they're definitely interfering.

 

[Shireling]

Kinda reminds me of when they edited the tape of that lady from Ferguson pleading with the protestors to stop burning the town down. What they omitted was that she then told them to go burn down the suburbs where the white people were.

 

[Imperator_tenebrae]

Media deception at its finest and using the nearest useful idiot to push an agenda down the throat of a nation of sheople.

Communist News Network, deceiving the public since 1980.

Journalism is dead and John Q. Public is blindfolded and too drunk to care.

 

[Hall Kervean]

Media deception at its finest and using the nearest useful idiot to push an agenda down the throat of a nation of sheople.

Communist News Network, deceiving the public since 1980.

Journalism is dead and John Q. Public is blindfolded and too drunk to care.

That's why I only listen to InfoWars



I'm smiling right now

 

[Imperator_tenebrae]

That's why I only listen to InfoWars

I'm a little iffy about Infowars. It's too much into tinfoil hat type stuff. I won't write it off completely but I wish they had a more tame person leading it than Alex Jones who is practically batshit crazy.

 

[Hall Kervean]

I'm a little iffy about Infowars. It's too much into tinfoil hat type stuff. I won't write it off completely but I wish they had a more tame person leading it than Alex Jones who is practically batshit crazy.

I realize that and I would not base everything off what InfoWars says.
After all, they're making the frogs gay.
But I'd take InfoWars over TYT.
In any case, I'd be more inclined to hear what CBS, ABC, and Fox have to say first before heading to youtube and hearing what my recommended people have to say with intervals of entertainment.
cough FailArmy cough

 

[Imperator_tenebrae]

I realize that and I would not base everything off what InfoWars says.
After all, they're making the frogs gay.
But I'd take InfoWars over TYT.
In any case, I'd be more inclined to hear what CBS, ABC, and Fox have to say first before heading to youtube and hearing what my recommended people have to say with intervals of entertainment.
cough FailArmy cough

I alternate between Fox and NBC just to see opposing sides but I prefer Brietbart, Townhall and Reuters as my main news sources before going to secondary sources which is a myriad of smaller entities including youtube commentators such as Sargon of Akkad.

 

[Hall Kervean]

I alternate between Fox and NBC just to see opposing sides but I prefer Brietbart, Townhall and Reuters as my main news sources before going to secondary sources which is a myriad of smaller entities including youtube commentators such as Sargon of Akkad.

Undoomed had a better voice :3
In all seriousness, yes, I watch whoever shows up in my recommended list. I've watched Ben Shapiro, Undoomed, Sargon, Andy Warski, Hunter Avallone, and FailArmy, because sometimes I need a break from stupid things and need to just watch FailArmy.
I'll peruse CNN and TYT once in a while just because they may have another angle.

One thing is certain, though, I'm not trusting Hillary. She just claimed that a thousand Russian agents, among other things, were the reason she lost... not through hacking the election, but by utilizing information.

 

[Imperator_tenebrae]

Undoomed had a better voice :3
In all seriousness, yes, I watch whoever shows up in my recommended list. I've watched Ben Shapiro, Undoomed, Sargon, Andy Warski, Hunter Avallone, and FailArmy, because sometimes I need a break from stupid things and need to just watch FailArmy.
I'll peruse CNN and TYT once in a while just because they may have another angle.

One thing is certain, though, I'm not trusting Hillary. She just claimed that a thousand Russian agents, among other things, were the reason she lost... not through hacking the election, but by utilizing information.

Oh yes indeed and I listen mostly the same people you do.

Most of all I want Trump to be successful just so I can see these regressives squirm and squeal like stuck pigs.