CNN tracks down random reddit meme poster and threatens to release his information

hatrickpatrick · 06-07-2017 12:48PM

sbsquarepants wrote: »

What exactly did he say about them?

Was it a hitler had the right idea, gas them all kind of thing or just these people all happen to be jewish?

In general I find a lot of the "anti-Semitic" hysteria tends to be blown out of all proportion. Just saying someone is jewish is hardly racist!

I don't want to embed the image because you know that Boards' mods are like, but basically he made a pretty big graphic showing a large number of senior executives including the CEO of CNN's parent company with stars of David next to their profile photos (so indicating that they are Jewish) and then captioning the image as "Hmmm... It's *almost* as if..." with the implication that this was a confirmation of the "Jews control the media" stereotype.

hatrickpatrick · 06-07-2017 02:09PM

Grayson wrote: »

has there been an update that I'm not aware of. I didn't realise the guys identity had been released by CNN.

No, that's not the guy who posted the memes but a tweet from the same journalist who threatened to dox him, condemning doxxing.

Christy42 · 06-07-2017 02:12PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

No, that's not the guy who posted the memes but a tweet from the same journalist who threatened to dox him, condemning doxxing.

Who also has clearly denied threatening him with doxing.

WinnyThePoo · 06-07-2017 02:13PM

sbsquarepants wrote: »

What exactly did he say about them?

Was it a hitler had the right idea, gas them all kind of thing or just these people all happen to be jewish?

In general I find a lot of the "anti-Semitic" hysteria tends to be blown out of all proportion. Just saying someone is jewish is hardly racist!

There's been plenty of links thrown up. He is a little vile racist. How anyone can question that is beyond me.

ScumLord · 06-07-2017 02:17PM

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

There's been plenty of links thrown up. He is a little vile racist. How anyone can question that is beyond me.

I don't see any links in the past few pages. Of course people are going to question it, you can't know one way or the other unless you ask the question in the first place.

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 02:27PM

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't see any links in the past few pages. Of course people are going to question it, you can't know one way or the other unless you ask the question in the first place.

is this racist enough for you?

http

/imgur.com/a/hfUAo

I haven't embedded it as a link on purpose. if you want to see the kind of stuff he posted then take out the space and then copy and paste the link.

hatrickpatrick · 06-07-2017 02:36PM

Christy42 wrote: »

Who also has clearly denied threatening him with doxing.

Personally I don't believe his denials for a second, given all the context. But if he didn't insert the line about future behaviour or else, then one of his editors did - which almost makes it even worse for CNN, that the order to add a conditional, "warning" element to the story came from someone more senior.

silverharp · 06-07-2017 02:37PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

is this racist enough for you?

http /imgur.com/a/hfUAo

I haven't embedded it as a link on purpose. if you want to see the kind of stuff he posted then take out the space and then copy and paste the link.

the one slight thing in his defence is that that section of reddit is called "im going to hell for saying this", where one is invited to sh1post. CNN never mentioned this.

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 02:43PM

silverharp wrote: »

the one slight thing in his defence is that that section of reddit is called "im going to hell for saying this", where one is invited to sh1post. CNN never mentioned this.

all that means is that he is either a troll, a racist or a racist troll. I'm going with the latter. This wasnt some dumb little kid. this was a grown man.

osarusan · 06-07-2017 02:44PM

Christy42 wrote: »

Who also has clearly denied threatening him with doxing.

It might well be the case that CNN never explicitly threatened him like this (we don't know what was in the initial emails/phone messages) but is there really any doubt that him deleting his posts and posting an apology was because of his fear that his identity would be revealed?

ScumLord · 06-07-2017 02:47PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

is this racist enough for you?

http /imgur.com/a/hfUAo

I haven't embedded it as a link on purpose. if you want to see the kind of stuff he posted then take out the space and then copy and paste the link.

Well it's clearly racist speech, although we were talking about memes. It's also all taken out of context. It's just one liners he's posted but we don't know what it's in relation to.

silverharp · 06-07-2017 02:51PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

all that means is that he is either a troll, a racist or a racist troll. I'm going with the latter. This wasnt some dumb little kid. this was a grown man.

you cant troll a section where one is invited to I'd have thought.

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 02:52PM

ScumLord wrote: »

Well it's clearly racist speech, although we were talking about memes. It's also all taken out of context. It's just one liners he's posted but we don't know what it's in relation to.

sorry, you think that stuff might be ok in context?

what do you think might be the context that makes this reasonable?

I hope Trump or Putin nukes Mecca and Medina and when that happens i'll jack off onto my computer screen over the pics of the vaporized goat ****ers who won't be here to ruin society anymore

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 02:53PM

silverharp wrote: »

you cant troll a section where one is invited to I'd have thought.

so we agree he is a racist then?

ScumLord · 06-07-2017 03:00PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

sorry, you think that stuff might be ok in context?

It's unlikely but when you take one line and view it in isolation it's hard to know. For all I know he was quoting someone else making a racist joke.

I just don't like anything taken out of context to push one impression. I'd rather come to my own conclusions.

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 03:03PM

ScumLord wrote: »

It's unlikely but when you take one line and view it in isolation it's hard to know. For all I know he was quoting someone else making a racist joke.

I just don't like anything taken out of context to push one impression. I'd rather come to my own conclusions.

so all the other examples in the image are just him responding to racist jokes?

ScumLord · 06-07-2017 03:11PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so all the other examples in the image are just him responding to racist jokes?

I don't know, I try to avoid making assumptions.

He seems like a vile person but I'm not going to assume I know a person based on one gif and a few lines taken from a board where people are known to say questionable things just for attention.

silverharp · 06-07-2017 03:28PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so we agree he is a racist then?

he might be or he might not be , Ive not enough information. I would take what a person says in the dark humour section of a website with a pinch of salt where the idea is possibly to get a rise out of other people.

I remember there was a meme going around last year about the Huff Post because all the editors were white women based on a photo they tweeted, so the joke was they weren't diverse even though its one of their main talking points, it wasn't a sexist meme, just a meme poking fun at the Huff for being a bit pompus. So likewise if you don't like CNN why not post a meme about all the top people being Jewish and saying they aren't diverse? on the face of it , its not an insult to Jewish people but making fun of an organisation that says it is all for diversity except within their own organisation which may or may not be true because its a joke

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 03:37PM

silverharp wrote: »

he might be or he might not be , Ive not enough information. I would take what a person says in the dark humour section of a website with a pinch of salt where the idea is possibly to get a rise out of other people.

I remember there was a meme going around last year about the Huff Post because all the editors were white women based on a photo they tweeted, so the joke was they weren't diverse even though its one of their main talking points, it wasn't a sexist meme, just a meme poking fun at the Huff for being a bit pompus. So likewise if you don't like CNN why not post a meme about all the top people being Jewish and saying they aren't diverse? on the face of it , its not an insult to Jewish people but making fun of an organisation that says it is all for diversity except within their own organisation which may or may not be true because its a joke

there is nothing humorous about anything in that link. it is straight up racist abuse. that people are so willing to to play it down or excuse it is not a good sign for how this country is going.

RandomName2 · 06-07-2017 03:46PM

seamus wrote: »

Funny how racists always start crying when people might find out they're racists. It's almost like it's not OK.

Anyway, this is very far from doxxing. He's not being extorted or blackmailed or threatened. If anything they're protecting him by giving him the opportunity to go quietly into the night. Breitbart or the Daily Mail would just publish.

They also didn't say that they would release his information if he did anything else. The provided a rider for legal purposes which maintains their right to publish this information in the future.

I'm not 100% surprised to see the apology for CNN's behaviour here. They would undoubtedly have released whatever personal information they had on the person, only they thought it might make them look bad: whereas getting an apology would be the best of both worlds in their eyes.

Trump still wins in the unprofessional stakes: this sort of childish, vindictive behaviour is truthfully more becoming of mainstream media than the head of government.

wes · 06-07-2017 03:55PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there is nothing humorous about anything in that link. it is straight up racist abuse. that people are so willing to to play it down or excuse it is not a good sign for how this country is going.

I could see some people defending the KKK, at this rate. A lot of these guys are rather straight forwardly racist, and amazingly people are still making excuses. It boggles the mind, as the guy himself said his own posts were unacceptable.

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 03:57PM

wes wrote: »

I could see some people defending the KKK, at this rate. A lot of these guys are rather straight forwardly racist, and amazingly people are still making excuses. It boggles the mind, as the guy himself said his own posts were unacceptable.

i was beginning to think i was on my own and i was just imagining it all.

ScumLord · 06-07-2017 03:59PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there is nothing humorous about anything in that link. it is straight up racist abuse. that people are so willing to to play it down or excuse it is not a good sign for how this country is going.

I don't think we are downplaying anything, just saying there's not enough information here to condemn someone. To me it seems more like your embellishing some fragments of information to back up your assumption.

I have already said multiple times he could be a deplorable human being, but I haven't seen enough to make any kind of judgements.

hatrickpatrick · 06-07-2017 04:26PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so we agree he is a racist then?

I'm happy to say that he probably is, yes. I'm also happy to say that even the vilest scumbag should be able to post whatever brain farts come into their heads on the internet without the threat of having their personal lives f*cked up because of that, and finally I'll still say that it's all a bit irrelevant, what really matters here is that a media organisation is trying to police society rather than merely talking about it, which is fundamentally wrong.

If one believes the journalist (which I'm very much not sold on just yet), then this situation is even more insidious than it first seems - the threatening "or else" element of the article came not from a writer but from a higher-up in the company, during editing. This implicates CNN far more than if they were able to say "this is just one reporter's opinion". Some editor felt that the company had the right to behave this way.

silverharp · 06-07-2017 04:29PM

the salient point here is that a multibillion media outfit threatened to open the gates of hell on a nobody US citizen, its worth remembering that the US first amendment covers this to the point where the ACLU have defended the right of KKK groups to have organised marches
Nobody elected CNN the moral arbiter of good taste on the internet and the internet is responding in a way that this legacy media dinosaur couldn't comprehend.

wes · 06-07-2017 04:35PM

silverharp wrote: »

the salient point here is that a multibillion media outfit threatened to open the gates of hell on a nobody US citizen, its worth remembering that the US first amendment covers this to the point where the ACLU have defended the right of KKK groups to have organised marches
Nobody elected CNN the moral arbiter of good taste on the internet and the internet is responding in a way that this legacy media dinosaur couldn't comprehend.

First amendment is to stop the government. CNN are not the government.

silverharp wrote: »

Nobody elected CNN the moral arbiter of good taste on the internet and the internet is responding in a way that this legacy media dinosaur couldn't comprehend.

You mean with doxing and death threats? The "Internet" has 0 moral high ground on this if you ask me.

ohnonotgmail · 06-07-2017 04:38PM

silverharp wrote: »

the salient point here is that a multibillion media outfit threatened to open the gates of hell on a nobody US citizen, its worth remembering that the US first amendment covers this to the point where the ACLU have defended the right of KKK groups to have organised marches
Nobody elected CNN the moral arbiter of good taste on the internet and the internet is responding in a way that this legacy media dinosaur couldn't comprehend.

wes wrote: »

First amendment is to stop the government. CNN are not the government.

You mean with doxing and death threats? The "Internet" has 0 moral high ground on this if you ask me.

as Wes said this has nothing to do with the first amendment. No idea why people bring this up.

Grayson · 06-07-2017 04:39PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Some editor felt that the company had the right to behave this way.

When if they did tie his behaviour to their silence, it was apparently at his behest. And they do have a right to do that.

and just one other thing. A few pages back you said he'd been doxxed. has that happened?

Grayson · 06-07-2017 04:43PM

silverharp wrote: »

the salient point here is that a multibillion media outfit threatened to open the gates of hell on a nobody US citizen, its worth remembering that the US first amendment covers this to the point where the ACLU have defended the right of KKK groups to have organised marches
Nobody elected CNN the moral arbiter of good taste on the internet and the internet is responding in a way that this legacy media dinosaur couldn't comprehend.

They haven't stopped him from doing anything. They haven't brought him any legal threats or anything like that. They haven't physically gagged him.
If the guy want to he can create all the memes he wants. They however have the right to post his details. They have that right as covered by the first amendment.

The only persons who free speech was infringed was the meme guy when the /donald redditors removed his post. And even then it's covered by terms and conditions.

You need to read up on rights and what they are.

marcus001 · 06-07-2017 05:12PM

wes wrote: »

First amendment is to stop the government. CNN are not the government.

False. What is "horizontal application"?

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

as Wes said this has nothing to do with the first amendment. No idea why people bring this up.

Maybe that's because you haven't studied American constitutional law.

CNN tracks down random reddit meme poster and threatens to release his information

Comments