CNN Is Deleting Pro-Bernie Sanders Comments

[pinebox]

Well......it would appear that CNN has some serious explaining to do.

Fuming Bernie supporters: Why is CNN deleting our comments?
http://mediaequalizer.com/brian-maloney/2015/10/fuming-bernie-supporters-why-is-cnn-deleting-our-comments

Seeing their comments repeatedly deleted by CNN, Bernie Sanders supporters are hopping mad today.
Already feeling the news network’s coverage had become rabidly pro-Hillary in the aftermath of last night’s debate, Facebook users leaving reactions on CNN’s page are now continually re-posting them, knowing they will be quickly removed. There are hundreds in a seeming battle with the network, with no explanation as to why.
Some users and messages appear to be specifically targeted, especially those accusing CNN of having conflicts of interest that make it naturally inclined to back Hillary.
In particular, they’re citing last night’s initial Facebook poll data showing Bernie had won the debate handily. They are claiming the network is now burying that information in today’s coverage.
That clip from last night’s post-debate show is still on YouTube, uploaded to a GOP channel. Some Sanders backers are linking to this:

This is rather bad. There's a LOT more in that article I would suggest people take a good long hard look at it.
There is also this video posted on youtube about it.

&feature=youtu.be

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. The emperor has no clothes. nt

[FlatBaroque]

3. Nor a pantsuit nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

44. Au contraire... The Empress has a semi full of pantsuits. nt

[JaneyVee]

74. CALL YOUR SENATORS RIGHT NOW!!!

[cosmicone]

2. Corporations have a right to defend against calumny and defamation

After what happened to Jane Goodall, Howard Dean and John Lewis's facebook pages, CNN was smart to hire alert bouncers to stop mischief on their property. (Yes, a facebook page is property and trespassing rules apply in cyberspace as well.)

If you want to exercise free speech, start cnnisevilandbad.com and post anything and everything there but no one has a right to vandalize, spam and stalk anyone's facebook page or other property.

[sabrina 1]

5. The American People have the RIGHT to defend themselves against corrupt, propaganda machines

operated by Giant Corporate Anti-Democracy Corporations.

Actually, in THIS Democracy, the people have MORE rights.

Maybe you were unaware that the US still claims to be democracy. What that means is it is NOT run by Corporations.

[cosmicone]

6. I gave a first amendment option in my post. You missed it perhaps? n/t

[sulphurdunn]

18. When a supposidly free press is in reality a private,

big money propaganda Wurlitzer, it's time to do something about it. The vast majority of the billion dollars spent on the next presidential election will go to the M$M. That is predominately 6 privately owned corporations. If you want to know who they will peddle, just follow the goddamn money and quit with the mouse has the same 1st Amendment rights as the elephant analogy.

[markpkessinger]

24. A "first amendment option" that applies only to those . . .

. . . who have the means and know-how to register their own domain and pay for its upkeep.

An organization that purports to be a news organization has no business carrying water for any candidate, except in its own editorial pieces. That standard applied whether it is Fox, MSNBC, CNN, or any of the broadcast networks. Deleting reader comments merely because they express an opinion contrary to that of the corporate management of a news outlet is vile and despicable.

[cosmicone]

61. Are you saying Bernie's campaign doesn't have the means? n/t

[mythology]

10. But you don't have the right to make somebody else host your speech

No matter if you type in super serious all caps or indignantly and inaccurately claim you have a right to make somebody else pay for it.

But some of us remain firmly entrenched in the real world where not everything is some grand villainous conspiracy against Sanders.

[Fawke Em]

46. There are many of us Bernie fans entrenched in the real world.

Your snide remarks about our sanity should be alerted on, but I don't do that. I just call you out.

The fact is that we Bernie fans are well-aware of how the real world works, which is why we were so pissed at the M$M. We know they are losing their glow, but, as of now, are still very effective at catapulting the propaganda. People still believe what they see on TV.

Online polls aside, the people were with Bernie in focus groups, Google searches, donations and social media buzz - all measures that could be scientifically counted and quantified, but when the M$M got in front of the story, Queen Hillary led the narrative.

I, a former newspaper reporter, knew they would do that. I've watched my former profession get wrested from principled reporters who wanted to tell the truth and report all sides and pounded into a propaganda machine Goebbels would envy. It's really no surprise to ANY of us living in the so-called "real world."

[GitRDun]

77. This is a tough one

I think CNN has the right to "defend" its social media "property".

I also think people have every right to post the comments they wish and call CNN out.

In the end, I think that battle and the publicity surrounding it is the right answer.

CNN defends its property, the battle gets publicity, and hopefully people read about it and decide what they think.

It's frustrating that there are no greater good morals in the media anymore, but, if that's the world we live in, I guess we all have to live with it.

[R B Garr]

11. Spamming websites is not Democracy.

Internet trolls getting caught spamming websites and then having their spam deleted isn't censorship.

[sabrina 1]

12. Deleting polls and comments that disagree with you is not Democracy.

[sulphurdunn]

22. You are not hearing the message from the Clintonites.

Media corporations have the same 1st Amendment rights you do. So, you can stand on the street corner and say what you want to passersby while they say what they want to millions of couch potatoes. You don't have to carry a sign for Hillary while supporting Sanders, and they don't have to suffer comments from Sanders supporter. You both have equal rights. How much fairer could it be than that.

[sabrina 1]

84. Thanks for verifying what is now obvious. I KNOW how things are regarding the Fourth Estate in

this country. Thanks for proving my point.

What you have said is true, but NOT in a Democracy. I guess you are not a proponent of a Free Press dedicated to telling the TRUTH. To reporting NEWS without BIAS.

But yes, we ARE sadly in a place where the Fourth Estate is now PRIVATELY OWNED.

Not going to bother with more.

It is heartbreaking to see our democratic institutions in the hands of corrupt Corporations.

But it is even MORE heartbreaking to watch people I once thought were willing to fight fiercely to protect those institutions AGAINST being corrupted by private Corportions, DEFEND the worst of the worst in terms of what they've done to our democracy.

On the good side I get to USE this to sign up new voters who so far, I have found are willing to fight to the death to END what you just used as some kind of defense of CNN.

Bernie WON the debate, the entire world knows that. And the reaction of the Corp Media only emphasizes how right he is about that State of our Union.

[Duckfan]

83. Amen

[R B Garr]

90. Bernie supporters sent out FIRESTORMING instructions

via Twitter (at a minimum) to spam CNN with cut/paste messages. Thats not Democracy.

I saw the spamming happening live. If I saw it, CNN saw it and deleted it. Good for them.

[oasis]

19. Exactamundo

[JDPriestly]

23. Do you have any evidence of the spamming of websites?

Hillary is accused of having paid people to like her on the web.

That is because she has a lot of likes from odd countries that we don't normally think of as showing that much interest in our elections.

I'm a huge Bernie supporter but I did not think to vote in any of the on-line elections.

Wouldn't Hillary supporters have been just as likely to spam websites as Benrie ones?

Fact is that Hillary supporters are not as excited about Hillary as Bernie supporters are about Bernie. And that is why Hillary's campaign accuses Bernie supporters of "spamming."

I think if there had been an organized effort to spam forr Bernie, we here on DU would have been the first to know.

The accusation that internet trolls are spamming websites is in my opinion just a weary defense mechanism.

The fact is that Bernie trounced Hillary in the debate, and that Hillary does not really tell the truth and that is why everyone likes Bernie so much.

Let's take the TPP issue. For the sake of the debate and because clearly many of us support Bernie ijn part because of his strong stance against the TPP, Hillary came out with a kind of a lukewarm statement that she opposes the TPP.

As soon as she came out with that, in the modern equivalent of the fine print, that is in little comments she made sort of on the quiet side of the media, she said, well, if only they change the labor text in it, I will support it. Hey! Hillary. We are against the TPP. There are not ifs ands about it. We oppose the kangaroo courts it sets up. We oppose the fact that it lets multinationals take our democratically elected governments into private rooms, force our countries to stand trial in front of panels in which the corporations get to choose a judge amd without the juries guaranteed in our Constitution impose fines on us taxpayers.

We oppose lengthening the duration of the periods under which works are protected by copyrights and discoveries and inventions by patents. This is especially true since human genetic material is under patent.

No way, Hillary. We do not want the TPP.

And we despise Hilary's' mealy-mouthed lying about where she stands on it.

Hillary talks out of both sides of her mouth at once. You just have to watch politics very carefully to catch her finesse in that regard.

This is JD Priestly, and this is my opinion.

[BeanMusical]

30. +1

[R B Garr]

92. Bernie supporters themselves Tweeted FIRESTORMING

instructions to spam CNN and obviously other websites. I saw the spamming live and CNN DELETED IT because it was obviously SPAM. Good for them.

And LOL @ all the mumbo jumbo about Clinton who had nothing to do with anything. If Clinton supporters did this to Sanders you people would be having epic meltdowns. You couldn't even handle a legitimate group like BLM interfering with Bermie's well-being while he was trying to deliver his well-worn vanity speech. I have to laugh at how you would handle hordes of internet trolls trying to steal his thunder at a debate.

[Fawke Em]

51. How, exactly, is leaving a comment "spamming" a website.

CNN has a Facebook page that is open to the public. If they didn't want to hear from people, then they shouldn't have it up.

[R B Garr]

88. Bernie supporters themselves described FIRESTORMING

the website, and others, apparently. DUer JaneyVee posted a Twitter post with instructions from Bermie supporters on cutting/pasting messages and spamming.

I saw the spam happening live. If I saw it, so did CNN, and they stopped the madness. Good for them.

[onenote]

35. Newspapers don't have to print letters that attack the newspaper.

Funny thing about a free press. It means editors have the freedom to edit. Sort of like how DU has a system for editing comments posted here.

[sabrina 1]

41. CNN is officially working for the Clinton Campaign. I will be part of the boycott that has started.

Sure they have a right to join a Political Campaign I suppose, but they have to suffer the consequences, which is they have forgeited their right to claim they are any kind of credible source on this campaign.

There are so many other actual news media thankfully.

No wonder polls show that only 17% of Americans trust the Corporate Media.

See, here's the thing. We all have the right to be idiots, no law against it.

But most of us, if we are running a business don't avail ourselves of rights that will cause harm to our businesses.

All the Corporate Media has done now is to CONFIRM that the lack of trust people have in them, is justified.

Good luck to them pretending to be what they are not.

We know what they are now, for sure.

There is a reason why Social Media is where a majority of people get their news.

Sanders won this debate by every measure. What CNN and the rest of Hillary's campaign workers have to say is completely irrelevant.

I can either go to Hillary's Campaign website, or CNN, same difference. I will do neither of course.

We have work to do.

[72DejaVu]

63. "Officially?"

Was there an announcement made, or did someone give you the power to make that designation?

[sabrina 1]

69. Lol, if it were just me, you'd have nothing to worry about. CNN is now widely viewed as part of the

Clinton campaign, along with the rest of the Corp media. Most of us won't be watching them anyhow. We will be busy helping the winner of this debate get elected.

Did you know that even before this disastrous and clearly desperate move on their part, polls show that only 17% of the population trusts the Corporate Media? I imagine that is about to sink even lower now.

When an entity that unpopular stands alone claiming they know who the winner was, well all I can say is, that is good for the ACTUAL winner.

Sort of like how Karl Rove, among the most hated morons in the world, helpe Bernie's campaign with his feeble attempt to smear him

It's a different world now. Reforms are sweeping the globe as the people take back control of their nations, and the old Corporatists are scared to death, as demonstrated by CNN's desperate attempts to hide the results of their own polls, and deletion of comments favorable to the Winner of the debate, and their shutting down of a small media outlet which was covering the Winner of the Debates.

[72DejaVu]

70. I remember when Democrats referred to ourselves as "the reality based community"

Those were the good old days.

[sabrina 1]

81. Not really. That was a Third Way meme, intended to insult the Left. Third Way hates the Left more

than they hate the Right. It was originally a Karl Rove quote airc. The Third Way admires Rove.

Proud to be an actual Leftie who despises all things coming from the Far Right fringes of society especially when there is even a whiff of Rove, one of the most vile unindicted criminals ever.

I would hardly call the old Bush era 'the good old days'.

[72DejaVu]

93. The term was widely adapted by Democrats

Particularly on Daily Kos.

We were proud to base our politics on facts, not cockamamie ideology. We differentiated ourselves from the creationists and climate deniers and the ilk.

The "good old days" were the days before so many Democrats went off the deep end into paranoia, conspiracy theories and witch hunting.

[cosmicone]

78. The CNN must be shaking in its boots

5,000 Bernie supporters are going to boycott CNN 1,000 times each .. that is a loss of 5 billion viewers!

I feel sympathy for CNN.

[JDPriestly]

20. Remember the Howard Dean campaign?

How he was railroaded. We see that happening again with Bernie.

Is the private ownership of the news media compatible with democracy?

That is a question that companies like Fox, CNN, Comcast, etc. are going to have to ask themselves.

Why should we have the charade of elections and debates if the media is going to insert itself in order to manipulate the outcomes and then claim its "right to defend against calumny and defamation" when it gets caught in what some viewers suspect is election tampering at the level of opinion molding?

This is a real problem. CNN pretends to be a news media source. We have to ask it: is it really dedicated to presenting the facts or is it dedicated to presenting a fantasy that it wishes were the facts.

The fact is that Bernie is an exciting candidate. ALL OF THE FOCUS GROUPS including the Fox focus group picked Bernie as the winner of the debate.

Nearly all of the news media picked Hillary. How out of touch with reality can the news media be and still claim to be a trustworthy?

We used to laugh at the USSR's Pravda. But now we have to ask what our news media is all about? Many of us have suspected that there is a problem since the selling of the Iraq War.

There was Howard Dean. -- The selling of a false image of him by a media determined to destroy his campaign (not necessarily talking about CNN here).

Then there was the throwing of the 2000 campaign with the news media meme that George W. Bush had won when that was not true.

We have a media problem. The press has the right of free speech, but so do ordinary people.

CNN can delete comments it disapproves of. We do that here on DU all the time.

But here on DU we represent ourselves as a website for Democrats.

CNN represents itself to be a responsible news media network that presents the unbiased truth.

It's OK to present a biased truth if you admit that is what you are doing.

What is wrong here is that CNN sells itself as a trustworthy news reporting network, and people are suddenly questioning that.

I have never had any reason to question CNN's honesty before this.

A lot of the problem is that we used to divide opinion comment from news delivery. That's what I was taught in high school way back in the 1950s.

Apparently that ethical view of news reporting has been replaced by one that permits a lot of mixing of opinion and news coverage. There is no longer any attempt to separate the true. That is true for the left- as well as the right-wing coverage.

Maybe CNN needs to make clear what in its work is biased and what is truthtelling.

Maybe then it could save its reputation. Because what CNN and other media are doing now is confusing to the public. CNN has the right of free speech, but the question is whether it should be honest with the public about how it is using that right.

Can the news be owned?

And what is the responsibility of the free press?

I decided some years ago that I would no longer subscribe to cable precisely because of this sort of abuse of the trust that we place in our cable and network news.

The Iraq War and the subsequent damage did it for me.

I no longer subscribe to cable. I do look at the news on the internet.

People are entitled to their opinions and free to express them. That includes CNN. But if they present their news as reflecting the truth, then they have an ethical and moral duty to be honest with the public. If they aren't honest about their manipulation and misrepresentation of the truth, then the public will not trust them or their version of the truth.

And then we have a huge problem in our country. We have a crisis in our democracy and at the level of our government. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton. She is too deeply entrenched in this kind of irregularity. That's why she has the big bucks, and that is my opinion. I am not presenting it as fact.

[cosmicone]

21. So you want to nationalize banks

and now you want to nationalize news media as well?

Do we really want our own Pravda?

[hopemountain]

26. how is this laughable?

cnn's efforts to influence voting while claiming to be "news" is a disgusting. shame on them.

[BeanMusical]

31. They already have the same integrity and credibility as the Pravda.

[Fawke Em]

52. They are already Pravda.

Except, instead of being owned by the government, they are owned by a handful of elites.

Fascism.

Period.

[MADem]

55. Look what GW Bush did to PBS!!! Yeah, nationalizing the media....that's the ticket!!

If we thought they had their nose in his ass before, they would have had their entire heads up there if he'd actually "owned" the media!

Oh, the opinions one reads here...

[cosmicone]

59. They want everything to be like DU

where they can post blatantly racist and homophobic messages while hiding messages of the opposition.

Revolution!!! Where have we seen this before?

No no no ... Bernie is no socialist .. no sirreee ... while they sharpen their guillotines, pitchforks and sickles

[MADem]

60. Ooooh la la!!! nt

[daleanime]

68. It's hard not to think....

that you're simply determined to start a flame war, it's fine to tear the party apart as long your piece comes out ahead.


Truly sad behavior. Go ahead and make your mocking response, I won't interfere with your fun.

[daleanime]

66. Are you so happy with our corporate 'Pravda'?

No, wait, I know the answer to that.....

[cosmicone]

71. I am not ... I disagree with Salon, NY Times, Fox News

and many many others who are slinging mud at Hillary - most of the time twisting the truth and occasionally with completely false stories.

I would never want to give a call from the mothership to fellow faithfuls to go and repeatedly vandalize their websites.

I believe in the first amendment.

If I don't like what I see, I'll express my disagreement in an alternate mouthpiece. Thanks to our free enterprise system and the constitution, another media outlet more to everyone's liking is just around the corner.

I disagree with a lot of people like Raul Grijalva to whom I gave a maximum campaign contribution. Would I want his facebook page trashed? Absolutely not.

The problem with many Bernie supporters is that they are salivating over authoritarian prospects and a chance to bring the rich down whom they subconsciously envy.

When Bernie says "revolution" or "people will take to the streets", I don't think he means people with pitchforks and shovels invading mansions and dragging the bourgeois out to guillotine them. (At least I hope he doesn't mean that.)

Yes, you don't like CNN. I get it. CNN gets it. Your message has been heard. They have rejected your message. The ONLY reason you don't want CNN to hide the posts (and it is not like you're not being heard) is to show your bully power to the world of how you trashed CNN's website. CNN was smart in hiring bouncers to delete those messages.

There are many legitimate avenues to express displeasure at CNN. Take a peaceful march to CNN HQ. Write to all the newspapers to express displeasure in the "Letters to the Editor" section. Give interviews to the local media. Use an existing website to express your displeasure. Start a new website against CNN.

I find what was done to facebook pages of Jane Goodall, Howard Dean and John Lewis DESPICABLE.

Enough of playing the victim card. Bernie is not some babe in the woods who needs to be protected violently. He and his campaign of capable people can handle it. His bully supporters controlled from mothership reddit are an embarrassment and frankly, I don't want the government's power in the hands of people whose disdain for democracy and freedom of thought, freedom of press and freedom from bigotry is so manifestly obvious.

The attempts to swarm everyone who disagrees with you and to censor their free speech and/or vandalizing them, shaming them and/or attacking them are childish behaviors.

Granted Bernie had a bad week. In Bernie supporters' collective mind, he was expected to throw a knock-out punch at Hillary and they probably conjured up images of Hillary laying on the floor bleeding from the mouth while Anderson Cooper counts to 10. We didn't expect it to happen.

The first step towards good mental health is getting an insight. Perhaps Bernie supporters should look inward and wonder what happened to them. Why they perpetually feel victimized. Why they feel they have to express every minor frustration and disappointment in a violently angry manner. Why this need to bulldoze everything that comes in the way. Why the authoritarian impulse to control everything.

Look inwards.

[AOR]

72. Your "freedom" exists in a tidy booklet produced by ruling class slaveowners...

[cosmicone]

73. Whatever that means ...

but I suspect it is silly.

[AOR]

75. In light of your splendid posts here today...

which have consisted of spewed right-wing talking points from one end of this forum to the other I think you can decipher easily enough what that means. "Look inward" and you will find the answer!!!

[JDPriestly]

79. I do not want to nationalize banks or the news media.

The news media is entitled to own its shows.

We the people have the internet and our own news media.

But CNN and other media should not claim they own the political debates.

And Debbie Wasserman Schultz should have insisted as a part of the contract for the airing of the debates that CNN allow free use of their entirety.

It is simply beyond comprehension that a network or a cable TV company is claiming a copyright or ownership of the debates.

I wonder whether the candidates were aware that CNN would claim ownership to their statements and appearance in the debates afterward.

There is a huge difference between nationalizing the banks or the media and regulating them or requiring them to do certain limited things in the public interest.

I believe, however, that it is North Dakota that has a state bank that does very well and may have helped North Dakota weather the 2008 crash better than the rest of the nation.

I would like to see California have a state bank. I would love to be able to deposit money in it.

We already have Pravda. Our mainstream media is no more honest than Pravda. I don't trust it at all. I would tell you why but it is a very long story.

[cosmicone]

85. They are claiming copyright only on unauthorized rebroadcasts

No one is hurt or aggrieved. The footage is available for free directly from the source.

By the way, it was not just DWS -- all the candidates signed off on the debate parameters -- including guess who? Bernie Sanders.

So it is spurious to blame CNN when your own candidate signed off on the arrangement.

[JDPriestly]

86. If they weren't claiming their copyright, there could be no "unauthorized" rebroadcasts.

By defining rebroadcasts as "unauthorized" they are claiming copyright on what matters -- the right to rebroadcast.

[cosmicone]

87. and that very right was signed off by Bernie and other candidates.

Case closed.

[hopemountain]

25. jdpriestly - the voice of reason

even in the early 60's, schools of journalism were teaching standards of truth and objectivity.

i will not support hillary in the primary and now, i am questioning voting for her if she wins the primary - integrity is losing it's meaning.

[Egnever]

34. You should not question voting for Hillary if she wins the primary

Hillary might not reflect your views as closely as you would like but president Trump would be a freaking disaster.

[hopemountain]

36. i reserve the right to my own decision.

my vote is still my voice and i will not be sheepled for a deceitful liar.

[Egnever]

37. It certainly is

That doesn't take away from the fact that refusing to vote will be one step closer for the republican clowns to take over the country.

Work against her as hard as you can in the primaries but come general time anything but a vote for a D whoever it is is a vote for disaster.

[cosmicone]

40. but but .. this is MY car mom

You said it was mine when Dad gave it to me for my 16th birthday. It is mine and mine alone and I'll drive it my way.

(Teenager's words just before he/she hits a tree and totals the car)

[Fawke Em]

53. God, Hillary supporters are so condescending.

Reserving your right to vote or not vote is NOT the same thing as being a child.

In fact, deciding NOT to vote for a lying corporate war hawk is a very adult thing to do.

I won't be voting for her if she's the nominee, either - and I said that MONTHS ago to my husband before Bernie ever entered the race. I don't trust her. I don't trust her judgment. I can vote for who I damn well please. I'm tired of being told "well this corporate Dem is still better than the Republican" because, with her, I don't think so.

[Travis_0004]

62. Results of Jury Service

On Fri Oct 16, 2015, 07:00 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

but but .. this is MY car mom
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=692217

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is disruptive, insensitive, and over-the-top. There is no reason to be condescending of other's view points on DU (and no I am not Fawke Em)

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Oct 16, 2015, 07:08 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: ?
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not the most sensitive reply ever, but hardly worth wasting a jury's time.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I can't believe this has been alerted upon - nothing wrong with it but......the alerter seems to have a chip on his/her shoulder.....&quot and no I am not Fawke Em)"
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Calling out a du poster as a teenage tantrum. No.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[72DejaVu]

67. You are questioning not voting for Hilary

because you are mad at CNN?


Sure, that makes sense.

[Skwmom]

64. Excellent POST! n/t

[72DejaVu]

65. What's the alternative to private ownership of the news media?

You want government run news media?

[JDPriestly]

80. No. I do not want government-runn media.

But the private owners of media should understand that their function in our society is not just to entertain and to manipulate. When it comes to election debates and to reporting the news, they should understand that even though they are privately owned, they have a duty to the public, to our democracy, to our country, to avoid claiming copyright or ownership to certain public events -- like political debates and presidential speeches or speeches before Congress when they have the honor of broadcasting those events.

It is a matter of integrity.

CNN should have been required by contract to place the debate video and transcripts in the public domain as soon as the show was airing.

It is unbelievably unpatriotic and undemocratic of CNN to claim ownership rights to that debate.

Certainly it should not claim any right to edit the statements of any of the candidates unless the candidates request it -- and even then, we should be allowed to quote and air among ourselves every word of that debate.

Surely a cable network like CNN makes enough money to place political debates in the public domain.

I am appalled at the obvious bias of CNN.

Someone here asked me if I wanted to have Pravda.

I said we already have it.

If you listen to Pacifica's stations and much of the radio and TV online you realize how extremely narrow and limited the viewpoints presented on the network and cable TV news shows is. If you listen to liberal radio and watch liberal TV like Democracy Now and Thom Hartmann and The Young Turks, then go back to mainstream media, you realize the difference and don't want to pay for the junk on the mainstream media any more.

[JDPriestly]

82. Private ownership that has some allegiance to the people of the United States and the integrity

to recognize and acknowledge and fulfill the public duty that right of the freedom of the press tacitly requires.

Media has a duty to report wilitth integrity. If it doesn't do that it endangers our country.

Take for example, the Iraq War. A few politicians have admitted what a terrible mistake that war was. The build-up to the war united the press in a frenzy of irrational anti-Iraq "reporting." In fact the press without apparent questioning merely repeated the false assumptions, the unexamined propaganda, the lies of the Bush administration.

The press was extremely irresponsible in that matter.

In reporting the Howard Dean scream and the Bush victory, the press, in general, also proved no ability to investigate beyond hysterical reporting by specific sources with a particular bias.

Again, with the debate, we find the press and the media strangely united in declaring Hilary the winner while all the polls on the internet as well as the focus groups declared Bernie the winner.

When the press is so unanimously opposed to the opinions of the general public -- and the focus groups are selected scientifically to represent public opinion just like other polls, there is something wrong with the press.

It isn't really a question of private or public ownership. It is a question of our free press, first being almost entirely in the hands of just a few private owners and second, of a press that serves the oligarchs and not the people.

It's very sad. We saw the excesses of communism in the Soviet Union. Are we seeing the excesses of capitalism in our country? I don't know the answer to that question for sure, but I do not think we can avoid asking that question at this point. And one reason I support Bernie is that I think he might ask it and find a fairly objective answer. Maybe our private corporations take their ownership rights to the point that they deprive us of our rights -- like our right to choose a president.

Definitely something that this CNN caper should cause us to ask ourselves.

Have we reached a point at which the consolidation of the major media in so few hands interferes with the free speech of the public?

This entire affair causes me to want to know just where Hillary claims she stands on net neutrality. Not that she will tell us the truth if we ask her. She will just weasel an answer that sounds good at the moment and then qualify it in some small venue a few days later as she has with the TPP.

How foolish can people be as to support Hillary?

It just amazes me.

[72DejaVu]

94. You were doing pretty well there for a while

I spent a decade working in community radio, and am currently involved in a project to create a new community station, so I am not unsympathetic to your views.

But you lost me when you started spouting that already tired nonsense about the press v. the polls. You're obviously an intelligent person. I don't believe you buy into that obvious canard. I think you know damn well that internet click polls are worthless.

How foolish can people be as to believe easily disproven bullshit?

[99th_Monkey]

4. CNN is publicly disgracing itself. This is not "journalism" , if it ever was.

It's Orwellian thought control in action folks.

[sabrina 1]

7. Yes, worse than Fox. And it totally discredits their claim that Hillary won the debate. They are

demonstrating why their 'conclusions' have ZERO merit. They are now part of Hillary's campaign obviously, so ANYTHING they say that is pro Hillary, is meaningless.

[restorefreedom]

13. i am almost embarrassed to say

I have been turning to FOXNews more recently, especially for breaking news and not political analysis. I will not watch CNN again. And ironically, shep Smith is actually quite evenhanded. One could almost think he's a closet Liberal.

[BeanMusical]

32. CNN: Clinton Nomination Network

[sabrina 1]

39. That's what people are saying, CNN now officially part of Hillary's Campaign. They have lost the

right to comment on this election unless they attach a disclosure statement 'we are working for the Clinton Campaign'.

There is a move to boycott them now starting on Social Media.

I won't be tuning in. I can just as easily go to Hillary's Campaign Website.

[BeanMusical]

43. I've been boycotting corporate media in general and CNN in particular for a long time.

Propaganda gives me a rash.

[sabrina 1]

45. I only watched them because of the debate, or when Bernie is on. Otherwise since they helped lie us

into war during the Bush era, I could not stand to watch any of them. Won't be doing so now for sure.

The Debates should NOT be hosted by any of the Corporate controlled media.

[BeanMusical]

47. I totally agree with you.

[Baitball Blogger]

9. The newspapers have been doing this for a while.

Social media will expose them.

[Baitball Blogger]

8. Cut and Paste strategy recommended.

[erronis]

14. Unfortunately, all these M$M sites will do is institute a delay in actual posting

Each post with a possibly non-corporate-approved slant will be shunted into a folder to be viewed by real chimps (until the AI ones catch up.) It will never make it to the publicly-viewable site until the lead apparatchik deems it sanitized and blessed.

[sabrina 1]

49. Social Media is now setting up their own accounts on Utube etc rather than going to the Corporate

censors and exposing them where they cannot delete comments.

They are the old dinosaur.

Corrupt, we saw that when they lied us into Iraq.

I just saw a poll today showing that only 17% of the population trusts the Corporate Media.

People trust the New Media now.

[Bubzer]

15. So surprise. CNN is officially banned in my house... right along side fox

[Agony]

91. Yup, the minute they hired Beck the Idiot.

done.

[olddots]

16. social media can ane will be hacked also

Why Bernie made it this far is because everyone in America isn't as stupid and the 1% want .

[jalan48]

17. It's becomming harder and harder for the .1% to hide.

We're on to them and their sneaky little ways.

[Unknown Beatle]

27. It's confusing as hell!

For the life of me, I can't understand people that stand behind Hillary do or die. I even had a writer of an extremely popular blog tell me that I was delusional if I thought Hillary accepted money from Wall St. No matter how much factual information I presented to that writer, it didn't matter, they were right and I was wrong. How the fuck can you present your argument with that type of thinking? How can facts have no impact on them? It's confusing as hell!

I can understand when I talked to republicans about anything and facts didn't matter, but people that consider themselves democrats? Not only that, they consider themselves progressive dems. WTF?

[upaloopa]

28. Gee met their match?

The crew and guests were laughing their asses off at the Bernie callers to Stephanie Miller this morning who were threatening a boycott of her show because she was reading the Salon and Huffington Post pieces about Bernie supporters social media tirades. It was hilarious.

[Fawke Em]

56. I gave up listening to her, too.

She's really not that great.

I like Thom better.

I literally moved my lunch hour so I could go out when Thom is on instead of Miller.

[upaloopa]

95. I could have guessed that reading your posts.

You must have enjoyed the his substitute this week. He was really Bernie 110%

When they call Mark Thompson or Stephenie who don't buy into the anti Hillary tirades they whine and spout their media conspiracy theories and bull shit talking points. It is the same stuff word for word as posted on this board.

[Uncle Joe]

29. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, pinebox.

[BeanMusical]

33. Kick and R

[Robbins]

38. why do they bother

i keep being told clinton won debate and race is over.and Bernie is ilrelvent so why bother deleting comments or shuting down
bernie2016 youtube channel if all that is true.

[moobu2]

42. Bernie Sanders did not win the debate.

The Bernie campaign posted links to online polls during the debate so his followers would go vote and distort the results. Everybody knows it so enough about Bernie Winning the debate...it isn't true. Hillary Clinton won fair and square. Maybe BS will have a better debate next time but I hope he prepares and doesn't depend on his usual catch phrases and caned comments he drones on and on with at all his rally's. It gets a little old after a while.

[Fawke Em]

58. Again, you ignore the focus groups, the donations, the Google searches and the social

media follows and buzz - all measurable and quantified.

Bernie won all those things, too, and not just the easily-manipulated online polls.

God, we're not STUPID.

[Capt. Obvious]

50. You messed up the talking point

You were suppose to say Alex Jones followers.

[jberryhill]

54. Some do seem to be

I support Sanders.

The notion that anyone's vote is influenced by comments on CNN's website in the first place is absurd. It's simply where convinced partisans exchange barbs.

Websites like that only have comment sections because it drives up page views and clicks from people who spend too much time online in the first place.

[MADem]

57. Because the poor man draws a small but vocal percentage of his support from those clowns.

If you can struggle through it, take a look at some of the comments on this web page--they are, to put it mildly, surprising:

https://www.facebook.com/ronpaul/posts/10154102160306686

Here's another article that gives a bit of perspective:

http://ivn.us/2015/05/08/bernie-sanders-will-steal-ron-paulers-heres/

[valerief]

76. CNN is Fox Lite. What do people expect? Fairness???? nt

[DCBob]

89. I would like to see some examples of comments deleted.

I suspect they contain more that just pro-Bernie statements.