Behind The Apology, CNN Identified The Man Behind The Trump/CNN Wrestling Redditor

[writes3000]

If you too guessed the Redditor who had boasted he originated the CNN-bashing GIF used by President Donald Trump suddenly apologized for same because he found out CNN knew who he was — congratulations!

And, if you also guessed “HanA**holeSolo” has pleaded with CNN not to reveal his identity because he’s scared for his personal safety, and because it would embarrass him to be outed as the person behind the GIF and various anti-Semitic and racist Reddit rants – go to the head of the class.

CNN reported Tuesday night it has agreed not to reveal the guy’s name, but reserves the right to do so should he ever repeat his “ugly behavior on social media.”

“HanA**holeSolo” initially boasted he originated the GIF behind Trump’s tweet in which Trump is seen pounding on the head of a man whose face has been swapped for the CNN logo.

HAS first shared the GIF last Wednesday; CNN reports it could find no earlier instance of the GIF that subsequently was edited to add sound before being tweeted by Trump on Sunday.

After Trump’s tweet, “HanA**holeSolo” took a victory lap, via Reddit:

“Holy s—!! I wake up and have my morning coffee and who retweets my s—post but the MAGA EMPORER himself!!! I am honored!!”

CNN reports its KFile identified the man, using information he had posted on Reddit and Facebook.

On Monday, KFile reached out to the man by email and phone, but he did not respond.

In one of those incredible coincidences, on Tuesday HanA**holeSolo suddenly saw the error of his ways, and posted a lengthy apology on the subreddit /The_Donald, in which he said he admires and respects the press and all of mankind.

He also deleted his other offensive posts.

Moderators of /The_Donald subreddit took down his apology.

After posting his apology, he called CNN’s KFile and confirmed his identity.

In that phone interview, “HanA**holeSolo” asked CNN not to name him out of fear for his personal safety and “for the public embarrassment it would bring to him and his family,” the network reported, describing him as sounding “nervous.”

During that phone call, he told CNN the White House had not asked permission to use the GIF, and said he probably would have denied them permission. CNN did not report whether their reporter asked him to square that with abovementioned “I am honored” gush.

But CNN did ask him about all those racist, Islamophobic, and anti-Semitic posts. The man explained:

“I love people of all races, creeds and origins. One of my best friends is a homosexual and one of my best friends is Jewish and one of my best friends is Muslim.”


http://deadline.com/2017/07/donald-trump-cnn-identifies-gif-creator-apologizes-1202123733/

[JI7]

1. i wonder if it's a someone that is publicly known

maybe a pundit or something.

[HipChick]

2. CNN 1 Drumpf 0

I'd bet Law enforcement or military....He'll prob do a disguised interview..Good job on tracking him down..

[JI7]

3. this guy is a coward piece of shit

so typical of trump supporters.

[LonePirate]

4. I disagree with CNN's decision. Racists need to be outed. Too bad if he suffers consequences.

[cyclonefence]

15. I agree with you

The outing isn't what's embarrassing. His own words are. Any shame his family feels was brought on by him, not by CNN.

Furthermore, I'm not comfortable with CNN trying to control this guy's freedom of speech through a threat to unmask. One of the many good things about freedom of speech is that it allows us to see how awful the speaker is.

[Trekologer]

22. Freedom of speech is only freedom from the government restricting you

It does not mean freedom from the consequences of your speech or freedom from others thinking you're an asshole.

Secondly, while I agree that anonymous speech is important, it is incumbent on the individual wanting to remain anonymous to take actions to protect their identity. Obviously the Reddit poster did not do that and CNN was able to identify the individual behind the online handle.

[Loki Liesmith]

26. Historically not true

Freedom of speech has historically meant freedom from censorship and this has not always been applied to the government. Only the government can violate the first amendment but free speech can be limited in many governmental or non-governmental ways.

[Trekologer]

28. How would CNN identifying the author be limiting speech?

They wouldn't be stopping the author's speech or restricting it in any way.

[Loki Liesmith]

37. Well I don't actually care about this particular case

But the argument is that it discourages future speech by attaching a strong penalty to it.

[BannonsLiver]

9. A classic false equivalency

[Doodley]

10. Oh really? How is that?

[BzaDem]

14. I'm not sure this constitutes blackmail.

In a blackmail situation, the purpose of a threat is to cause a change in behavior. I don't think CNN initiated this conversation because they had a deeply held desire to change the behavior of a single internet troll. I think they initiated the conversation because they thought the result might be newsworthy (whether or not they identified the person in question).

In the end, it looks like they concluded that the negative privacy-related consequences outweighed whatever incremental newsworthiness would result in identifying the person in question. I believe news organizations frequently make these types of judgements (particularly with kids, but also with adults).

If exercising any such judgement is considered blackmail (or otherwise wrong), then journalists have a choice in these situations: always release personal information, or never do so. The privacy problems with always doing so are obvious. However, it would also be strange to promise that they would *never* release his identity, under any circumstances. What if he continued his behavior, and that continuation of behavior became more newsworthy (perhaps on its own, or perhaps because of some external event)?

I'm not saying CNN did a great job of handling this (and for all I know, my guess as to their motivations could be wrong). But CNN's decisions here don't seem clearly wrong at first glance.

[bellmartin]

24. There are rules. Relevant quote from The Office:

Phyllis: Oh, I don't think it's blackmail. Angela just does what I ask her to do so I won't tell everyone that she's cheating on Andy with Dwight. I think for it to be blackmail, it would have to be a formal letter.

[BzaDem]

35. Yeah, that makes sense, if you completely ignore everything I wrote. n/t

[bellmartin]

38. Both The Office and my comment quoting it were in jest. You knew that, right?

[BzaDem]

39. I thought you were using a joke to argue how this was obviously blackmail.

It appears that I misinterpreted. Sorry about that.

[bellmartin]

40. No, just wanting to add a moment of levity in what I agree is a serious discussion.

I appreciate the apology. Fully accepted.

[ProfessorGAC]

13. Blackmail? How?

They get nothing out of withholding his identity
So, blackmail isn't even close to a descriptor of this situation
You're just taking a provocative position for the sake of provoking
Silly!

[Stallion]

6. Is it Time For Internet Posters to Be Unmasked?

Ha! I have several non-political personas on various websites that would be problematic if I posted under my real name. It might restrain free speech some-but I'm concerned with where the internet is going. Would the internet be better if we had to stand behind our posts?

[JI7]

8. it wont restrain free speech . they still have a right to post what they want without govt

going after them for it .

[musicblind]

36. I've never understood the multiple "personas" thing.

I post on all kinds of websites... from wrestlingforums to US Atlas to Twitter. I usually use the same screenname, often that name is attached to personal emails or even my facebook. I don't have multiple personas... I just have me.

Do I have different sides? Sure. There is a side of me that likes talking about weightlifting on BodyBuilding. There is a part of me that likes talking about pop music and fanfiction on Tumblr, there is a part of me that likes talking about movies on IMDB (may those forums rest in peace.)

But under each of those posts, it's still me. It's still my personality, my persona and I'm not ashamed to have my name attached to it. My twitter handle is @IamDavidBryant and that is pretty explicit.

I'm not always a saint when posting online, but I don't think I'm particularly evil.

I don't hate other people and I hope they don't hate me.

So, I don't get the "multiple personas" thing. Don't get me wrong, you're not the first person I've met to tell me that they have multiple personas online. It seems like a lot of people do. I just don't, 'get it' ... I've always been an open book. I don't think anyone who knows me in real life would be surprised by any of my online accounts... not even my porn accounts.

[dweller]

7. f'n weenie n/t

[DetlefK]

11. Wait... They censored his apology bc he said he "respects the press and all of mankind"?

[Doug the Dem]

12. Another Profile in Cowardice

Typical of right-wingers, he can talk the talk, BUT.....

[oberliner]

16. "One of my best friends is a homosexual"

His "apology" sounds like more trolling.

[malaise]

17. Didn't the WH deny that they took the racist's GIF?

CNN should out this piece of scum - they want to hate behind a user name.

[dalton99a]

20. Absolutely.

[samir.g]

18. CNN should publish his information

Name, address, phone number, everything.

Destroy him.

[dalton99a]

19. Identify him to the world

[grossproffit]

23. He's apparently 15.

[SweetieD]

27. He isn't 15. That is some rumor being spread by altright flunkies. The cnn reporter

said he is a middle age man. This also makes sense because that apology was not written by a 15 year old.

[grossproffit]

30. Then they (CNN) should spill the tea.

[G_j]

21. Remarkable how Trump just stumbles upon

things posted by white supremacists and bigots.

[maxrandb]

25. I will say this unequivocally

I have never posted anything on DU that would embarrass me if my true identity were attached to it.

[oberliner]

32. What about other places?

Besides DU?

[dsc]

29. without knowing just what this person does for a living, I can't say if I agree with CNN or not

If this man has a position of any type of power (including teaching, managing, etc) or works closely and alone with people that belong to the groups he has posted hateful things about, I think the people who employ and use him have a right to know what he apparently believes is OK to post publicly. Say he is a teacher, if I were a gay kid in his class, I would want to know that and maybe change my schedule. On the other hand if he doesn't have power over people in his daily life then I can see letting him remain anonymous.

[oberliner]

31. They actually did not identify the person

Do you think they should?

[itcfish]

33. Sounds like

he has an awful lot of "best friends"

[Oneironaut]

34. Never do anything on the net you wouldn't mind sharing with the whole world.

You're not as anonymous as you think. Sometimes, getting doxxed is easy - especially with social media now.

I find it humorous that Reddit users believe that they can stay anonymous. Such a large forum is prime doxxing material.