One of the most interesting things to note is that the Clinton media is not an actual army, but they act like it. They have no tanks, jets, artillery, and troops. They are soft targets, as Clinton describes unfriendly journalists. When their addresses and personal info is leaked, that’s not good in a potential civil war. It is, in fact, very, very bad.
There is no point in posting them here, larger websites have already released the names, addresses, news agencies involved, phone numbers, everything, even pseudonyms. Most are not well-known figures but some are.
So the question, as of this writing, is if it would be a good idea to post these lists so these media assets would know this is serious and they are toying not just with the live of their fellow Americans but their own. Perhaps it would be a good heads up, provided the actual personal information is blurred. But suffice it to say they have everything, and it’s up to you to do the sleuthing. You are, after all, journalists right?
Study history. The first thing you will see in a civil war or coup, aside from armed takeovers of radio and television stations, is that the tongue of the controlled media is ripped from its gaping maw. Angry nations tend to do that. But what we are seeing is something these plants never expected. It’s not like the old days when these plants could simply not show up to work. They can’t even go home with peace of mind.
Pussies! “CNN sucks” Isn’t a Threat You Fucktards
Words kill, lies kill, and people remember.
You, in the corporate media, have no idea how dangerous this situation is and the level of enmity you have incurred against the most powerful intelligence agencies in the world and half of America. If you think this all comes from a basement hacker, you’re deluded. If it did, this would all be censored and the UN would have been able to shut down the net.
— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) October 21, 2016
Let us hope, and pray, that this revolution stays peaceful. The propaganda assets are no longer unknown, the entire network of embedded journalists was exposed, from those at the NYT, Washington Post, etc. This is not a good sign. This is not a threat to free speech since it doesn’t exist in a controlled media. It’s a threat to the controlled media that should have never existed in the first place.
For the sake of any semblance of credibility, to cast doubt on your role as a propaganda asset tasked with subverting a free election, please stand down. You have truly created a monster it’s time to walk away from. Wars are easy to start but very hard to stop.
— MiamiGator (@GatorsEite23) October 13, 2016
WikiLeaks List Exposes At Least 65 Corporate ‘Presstitutes’ Who Colluded to Hide Clinton’s Crimes
Thanks to Wikileaks and the Intercept, in fact, we now have a list of no less than 65 mainstream “reporters” whose campaign coverage constitutes propaganda for the Clinton campaign — and no wonder, considering the obscenely lopsided drivel presented by their outlets.Revelations from the Wikileaks release of John Podesta’s emails yet again prove mainstream, corporate media serves as Hillary Clinton’s personal cheerleading squad — and is devoid of any iteration of journalistic integrity.As (actual) journalists Glenn Greenwald and Lee Fang reported on October 9, the Intercept exclusively received documents obtained by the source known as Guccifer 2.0 evidencing Clinton campaign tactics to court journalists portraying the former secretary of state in a positive light.
“As these internal documents demonstrate,” the Intercept reported, “a central component of the Clinton campaign strategy is ensuring that journalists they believe are favorable to Clinton are tasked to report the stories the campaign wants circulated.
“At times, Clinton’s campaign staff not only internally drafted the stories they wanted published but even specified what should be quoted ‘on background’ and what should be described as ‘on the record.’”
One internal strategy document dated January 2015 — months before Clinton officially kicked off her campaign in April — with the curious heading “Earned Media/Next Steps” exposes how the campaign made an albeit infrequent practice of crafting supposed news pieces from beginning to completion.
Under the — not-at-all oblique insult to the fundamentals of journalism — heading “Placing a Story,” the memo’s author wrote:
“As we discussed on our call, we are all in agreement that the time is right [to] place a story with a friendly journalist in the coming days that positions us a little more transparently while achieving the above goals.”
Specifically named as a suggested journalist plant is Maggie Haberman of Politico, whom they note will assist in doing “the most shaping” of the narrative they have in mind.
Haberman, however, is far from the only pro-Clinton media shill. As the Intercept noted, a review of the metadata for one of the obtained documents found it had been penned by campaign communications director, Jennifer Palmieri — who created a list of ostensible pundits and journalists potentially amenable to targeting with the pro-Clinton message.
The Intercept also revealed an R.S.V.P. list of 38 media friendlies invited to a pre-campaign announcement soiree with ‘top campaign aides’ at the home of strategist Joel Benenson last year on April 10, which was “a fully off-the-record gathering designed to impart the campaign’s messaging.”
Although the outlets they represented unsurprisingly included left-leaning MSNBC, Huffington Post, and Politico, the list also includes journalists from the Daily Beast, Vice, Vox, The New Yorker, and even People Magazine.
In the Wikileaks document, the true scope of Clinton campaign skulduggery is revealed in another lengthy guest list for a parallel function hosted by Mr. Leaked Emails, himself, John Podesta, on April 9 last year.
Press secretary Jesse Ferguson — who authored both lists — wrote to the top members of Clinton’s team:
“Here is the current RSVP list to the Thursday Night (4/9) dinner at Podesta’s. As a reminder, this is with the 25 reporters more closely following HRC (aka the future bus).”
Although the collusion between the media and both the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee has graciously trickled out thanks to leaked documents from Wikileaks and others, these lists of named journalists willing to cross the line between journalism and campaigning are shameful — if not helpful tools to know with certainty whose reporting is garbage.
In fact, besides obliterating any previous claims of unbiased journalism made by the once-prestigious media institutions dotting these lists, the names and practices described prove mainstream media is effectively moot — by its own hand.