1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Nov 12, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Most press outlets already agree, for example, not to publish the names of minor criminals or victims. Agreeing not to publicize a mass shooter might fall into the same category.

    That said, we've been publishing the names of mass shooters for decades. Going back to Charles Whitman.

    The number of shootings and shooters held steady for years. Only recently has it spiked.

    So I'm not convinced the publicity has as much to do with this as people believe.

    But again, I encourage more science on the matter.
     
    Dick Whitman likes this.
  2. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    I'm curious about the charges agains these Russians. Aside from the identity theft, would any of their actions not be protected by the first amendment if carried out by Americans?

    Seriously?

    I think campaigns already to some of this. Whether it's spreading false information -- maybe through a fake dossier -- or trying to drive down participation among those who wouldn't support you, but might support your opponent.
     
  3. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    100% true. All of it.
    In a couple of cases -- can't remember specs because these things are so frequent-- I remember hearing a host say he wasn't going to mention the name of the shooter. But that does not appear to have become a trend.
    Still have to have a work-around for cases of active and on the loose shooters.
     
  4. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    Why do you presume this is the end of the revelations from the investigations?
     
  5. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Nobody thought Trump would win. Not you, not me, not Nate Silver or the New York Times, and not Putin.

    The Russian effort began in 2014, well before anyone thought Trump would actually run.

    The Russians also supported Bernie Sanders, and Jill Stein, neither of whom had any chance to win.

    It was always about discrediting Clinton.

    And, as we see from this indictment the goal switched, as soon as Trump won, to discrediting his victory. They continued to create conflict, by supporting opposing rallies, in the same cities, on the same day.
     
  6. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

  7. HanSenSE

    HanSenSE Well-Known Member

    Keep an eye on the voices of students. They're fed up and I think they're picking up the ball the adults have dropped here.

     
    Dick Whitman likes this.
  8. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    As I recall, MSNBC waited a long time after the Mandalay Bay massacre before putting up a story. Hours.
     
  10. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Because the DOJ specifically said that no Americans wittingly assisted in the campaign.

    And, because, as I've said all along, and as the indictment shows, the Russians didn't need any help from the Trump campaign to assist in their effort. They knew what they were doing, and were very sophisticated.

    And, it began well before Trump began running. His assistance was never part of the plan.

    It also makes plain sense. If you want to keep a plan secret, you tell as few people as necessary. Why would the Russians include Trump, or any of the other blabber mouths in his campaign, in their plan? The would just fuck it up.
     
  11. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

  12. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    Putin was angry Clinton questioned publicly the validity of Russian elections, and he was determined to take her down. That was the objective.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page