"The three major outlets that have acknowledged they also received stolen Trump campaign materials from Robert — Politico, the Washington Post, and the New York Times — have also declined to publish them.
-
William Lindsey :toad:wrote last edited by [email protected]
"The three major outlets that have acknowledged they also received stolen Trump campaign materials from Robert — Politico, the Washington Post, and the New York Times — have also declined to publish them. None of these outlets, however, have explained why their approach to stolen Trump campaign materials is so different from their approach to stolen Clinton campaign documents."
~ Judd Legum
#Trump #media #WashingtonPost #NewYorkTimes #Politico
/1EXCLUSIVE: The Trump campaign is still being hacked
Email communications from individuals associated with the Trump campaign have been hacked by malign actors within the last ten days, Popular Information has confirmed.
(popular.info)
-
William Lindsey :toad:replied to William Lindsey :toad: last edited by [email protected]
"Washington Post Executive Editor Matt Murray, for example, said he 'thought about who was likely to be leaking the [Trump] documents, what the motives of the hacker might have been, and whether this was truly newsworthy or not.' But in 2016, the paper knew that Russia was likely behind the hack of the documents and was using them to interfere with the presidential election."
-
William Lindsey :toad:replied to William Lindsey :toad: last edited by
"Nevertheless, the Washington Post's coverage included excerpts that were not, by any fair definition, 'truly newsworthy.'
The Washington Post, the New York Times, and Politico should be transparent about their decision-making and explain why it has changed dramatically over the last eight years."
-
Bauke Kramer 💚🎵😺🌈🚴replied to William Lindsey :toad: last edited by
@wdlindsy
No easy choice: whether to publish leaked or stolen information.
As long as you do not know the supplier's motives, you are on thin ice. -
William Lindsey :toad:replied to Bauke Kramer 💚🎵😺🌈🚴 last edited by [email protected]
@bmk But when you did so with such apparent insouciance in a recent election and now choose not to do so with claims that publishing material leaked by foreign sources — exactly what you published in 2016 — is inappropriate, you have a certain obligation to explain why things are different now. If you expect to be credible, that is….
-
Bauke Kramer 💚🎵😺🌈🚴replied to William Lindsey :toad: last edited by
@wdlindsy
That question certainly needs to be answered by the news media involved. It may be a progressive insight that they went along a bit too easily at the time.
But to be clear: any revelation that could damage Trump is more than welcomed! -
William Lindsey :toad:replied to Bauke Kramer 💚🎵😺🌈🚴 last edited by
@bmk I definitely think they owe us an explanation after blaring for days on end big headlines about Hillary's emails and then suddenly having scruples about sharing information leaked by foreign agents when the focus is on Trump.