The ignorance on display in this CNN interview segment concerning Wikileaks and Julian Assange yesterday is simply astonishing.
I’d expect the misinformed idiocy and/or out and out lying from one of the guests, former Bush Admin Homeland Security Advisor (now a paid CNN contributor) Fran Townsend. But the amount of ignorance about the profession of journalism, on display from CNN’s very own journalist here, Jessica Yellin, almost defies words. Happily, Salon’s Glenn Greenwald, a Constitutional attorney and actual journalist was the other guest on hand to help straighten both of these women out.
Watch the video, be amazed, and then I’ll have a few more words on it below, as it mirrors another recent — and embarrassing — WikiLeaks-related segment on CNN, which we critically covered before later receiving a response from both CNN and host Don Lemon…
The week before last, we took CNN and host Don Lemon to task for a WikiLeaks segment in which, among other problems, they started off with a package that compared Assange to Bonnie & Clyde and other criminals who did things like, ya know, actually commit crimes, like killing people and stuff — none of which either Assange or WikiLeaks has done. Not by a long shot. CNN’s on-screen chyron for the segment was, shamefully, “ASSANGE: JOURNALIST OR TERRORIST” (no question mark even included)…
After my critical coverage of the segment, I received a phone call from Lemon who, while standing by all aspects of the segment, declined to allow me to put any of his comments from our nearly hour and a half phone call on the record (ironically enough). He also declined my invitation to appear live on air, on the radio, on the Mike Malloy Show, which i was guest hosting that week, to discuss the issue and offer his point of view publicly.
CNN themselves similarly declined to offer a representative to appear on air to discuss the segment, but stood behind their labeling (libeling?) of Assange as a “TERRORIST” by sending me this official statement from CNN Worldwide public relations official Nigel Pritchard:
In reply, I sent this follow-up query:
In other words, aside from their being no basis at all for the charge that Assange is a “TERRORIST”, aside from irresponsible people suggesting as much without a shred of evidence, is CNN not troubled by the notion that they are advancing a suggestion which, if true, could well result in a private citizen being targeted for assassination and murder by either a governmental policy or an overzealous “patriot”?
Brad
I received no response from CNN to my follow up query.
In their segment yesterday with Greenwald, as posted above, they did not compare Assange to murderers or call him a terrorist on screen as before. Instead, their chyron this time read: “THE ROBIN HOOD OF HACKING”?
Robin Hood was, as legend has it, a thief who stole from the rich to give to the poor. Julian Assange, on the other hand, has neither stolen anything nor been charged with stealing anything. In fact — as Greenwald is embarrassingly forced to point out over and again in the segment above (to the journalist!) — he has neither been charged nor convicted of any crime at all related to WikiLeaks. Neither has WikiLeaks been charged with any crimes at all, much less convicted of “hacking”!
Twenty years ago, as detailed on his WikiLeaks page, Assange was convicted of hacking “and was released on bond for good conduct after being fined AU$2100.” The prosecutor in the case, according to a June 2010 profile in The New Yorker said “there is just no evidence that there was anything other than sort of intelligent inquisitiveness and the pleasure of being able to — what’s the expression — surf through these various computers”.
In 1987, prior to his conviction, according to the same report, he had written “rules” for hackers as follows: “Don’t damage computer systems you break into (including crashing them); don’t change the information in those systems (except for altering logs to cover your tracks); and share information.”
And yet, earlier this month, in regard to those charges when he was 20, Assange had to tell Forbes: “It’s a bit annoying, actually. Because I co-wrote a book about [being a hacker], there are documentaries about that, people talk about that a lot. They can cut and paste. But that was 20 years ago. It’s very annoying to see modern day articles calling me a computer hacker. I’m not ashamed of it, I’m quite proud of it. But I understand the reason they suggest I’m a computer hacker now. There’s a very specific reason.”
So what’s left of CNN’s “THE ROBIN HOOD OF HACKERS?” label that wasn’t already inaccurate before their most recent segment even began? Other than “THE” and “OF”, absolutely nothing. Even their question mark was baseless before the segment began, as CNN should have known if they’d bothered to practice any actual journalism in preparation.
There is no serious question, no serious debate about Assange or WikiLeaks as either “terrorists” or a “Bonnie & Clyde” or “Robin Hood” type figure. All of that is simply irresponsible, sensationalistic, childish garbage and smears from an organization which purports to practice journalism, even as its continuing, embarrassing, knee-jerk assaults on real journalists — i.e. WikiLeaks and Assange — reveal more and more that CNN seems incapable of practicing anything that even resembles it.
• Greenwald’s own thoughts on the segment at Salon: “The merger of journalists and government officials”
• David Edwards’ coverage of the segment at RAW STORY: “Greenwald trashes CNN contributors for ‘extreme misinformation’ on WikiLeaks”
UPDATE 12/29/10: Jessica Yellin responds to Greenwald’s critique. To her credit, she was willing to engage in the debate (where Don Lemon, unfortunately, was not). To her discredit, she failed to link to Greenwald’s critique when criticizing it.
One other thought on this for now: In her response to Greenwald, Yellin suggests that she “thought it would be helpful for viewers to hear a supporter explain Assange’s long-term objectives,” as if to say, she should be given credit for having Greenwald on at all. There is some truth to that, of course, and she was fair enough to give Greenwald plenty of time to make his case during the segment. The same can be said of Lemon bringing Ray McGovern onto his own show a week or two ago for the segment that we were critical of as well. He said as much in response to our critique. It’s swell to have an occasional supporter of WikiLeaks/Assange brought on the air to counter all of the usual nonsense heard from CNN (and so many others), but it’s not swell to bring an arrogant and uninformed, anti-journalism bias to such segments, no matter who is being brought on the air to discuss it.
Lest we forget, Assange did not obtain this material by ‘hacking’. He runs a whistleblower organization that receives information much the way the NYT or other papers do.
I used to think women were the future. The minds / attitudes of these two women really frighten me.
Use common sense she is Blonde
Ah yes the good old impartial american media, famed the world over….
Once again, the extremist mainstream media has been exposed for what it is. Brilliant! CNN/Fox News and other news tabloids are being held to account.
good post Brad, keep up the good work of keeping track of these guys and their misrepresentations.
shame on CNN which used to be years ago a different kind of news organization..
Watching CNN is just going to give you an ulcer or cancer worrying about the stupid people in the world who witlessly or willingly lap up their crap–so why do it?
Its the same sort of wallpapering they did with WMD’s/Iraq pre invasion- I guess it worked fine then so rinse and repeat.
I’m a big-time Wikileaks fan, but I don’t think I agree with the outrage.
Yeah the questions were leading, and yeah she did mention charges when (as journalist) she should have known better, but Glen Greenwald was given about 5 times the time as the other woman. If it had been reversed, then I would have been upset…
…So good for CNN for giving Glen a platform to make a clear a convincing case.
Julian is a hero for providing an environment where “whistleblowers” can submit information and there is then a likelihood it will get out to the general public. “Whistleblower” protection laws are very few and very weak in the U.S. (and elsewhere, I suspect) for a good reason – corporations and the governments who work for them don’t want word of their illegal operations leaking out to the public.
Someone smart once said, “Consider what your action will look like in the headlines of tomorrow’s paper before you take that action.” Wikileaks is all about getting the headline out there (with the details) to make corps and gvts think twice before doing dirty deeds. Too bad their aren’t about 1,000 Wikileaks, then the “evil-doers” (gotta love that word!) really would maybe think twice – but I doubt it.
Remember the facts – Assange has not been charged with ANY crime, NONE, Zip, Nada! Yet people make up in their own minds that he has violated some laws. So next time someone accuses him of a crime, ask them, precisely what law was it that he is accused of breaking? And don’t we consider folks innocent until proven guilty, or is that just an old fashioned idea these days?
Everything Fran said was complete bullshit and its a shame Glenn was interrupted for putting her in her place. I think CNN is pissed they were not a “media partner” with Wikileaks. Nice jab at Fran from Glenn on the “Many people think your former boss is a criminal” And I’m sure he could of finished up with putting them in their place when she said like “NYT has always come to the Govt. to redact information” yet hasn’t wikileaks and their media partners from the start offered to let the Govt redact yet they refused?
Shortbus @ 11 asked:
Yes. The Pentagon refused to help WikiLeaks redact the diplomatic cables.
LeftIsBest @ 10:
How pre-9/11 of you.
“‘Cryptome’ writes WikiLeaks’ obituary: Site’s purpose now ‘dead in the water’”
C.N.N
Corporate News Nobodies
Want to know what the ” Mainstream Media ” really is ?? ( I’m sure a few of you know already )
Go watch John Pilger’s newest docu ‘The War You Dont See’ its on Youtube…
Jessica Yellin seems to have very little awareness of the view she is promoting with her words, tone, framing, selectivity of focus.
I believe this lack of self-awareness between seemingly unknowingly promoted beliefs and the disastrous societal consequences often resulting from this kind of magic thinking is manifest in corporate media personalities in general.
It is incredibly weird that so many newspeople in positions of influence because of their media platforms seem to have so little idea of the societal directions they encourage, facilitate, and are an integral part in creating.
They actually think they’re being responsible, even-handed newspeople.
David Lasagna @ 16:
Co-signed!
Glenn Greenwald’s error is in assuming that Jessica Yelin is a “journalist.”
I will make a point of doing my part, by purchasing as many copies of the book as I can for friends and family, so that it becomes #1 on the best sellers list.
Of course the mainstream media is tearing into Assange, because if they didn’t then people like Brad (I can’t believe Brad fell for the WikiLeaks scam) and those commenting above would be suspicious.
Come on people, WikiLeaks is a government-run operation! You really think one Army PCF would have access to all that data? Ever hear of the word ‘compartmentalization’ in reference to the Intelligence Community? Go look it up.
Of course, the main proofs that WikiLeaks is a fraud is the fact that it fails to mention the greatest lie of the past 20 years. No, not 9/11 (though WikiLeaks fails to mention the false flag attacks of 9/11. In point of fact, WikiLeaks affirms that 9/11 was committed by 19 terrorists!), but the fraudulent ‘collapse’ of the USSR in 1991, and the upcoming ‘collapse’ of the regime in China, after which a phony ‘democratic’ government will emerge.
Assange is obviously being falsely charged with rape, but the reason he’s being charged for rape and being treated badly in the media isn’t because Assange is a Whistleblower, it’s because the government and media know that if mud isn’t thrown at Assange then people with suspicious minds will see through the masquerade.
Brad Friedman, I’m shocked you fell for Assange’s obvious lies.
I should have clarified the following in my previous comment:
For those of you wondering why the United States attacked itself on 9/11, well 9/11 was the United States’ counter move to the USSR’s fraudulent ‘collapse’ in 1991. The United States needed to maintain high defense budgets so a new enemy was created with a new phony ‘War on Terror’.
In the absence of a legal judgment, the illegal acts to ban WikiLeaks and other websites from global accessibility have largely backfired by promoting mirror sites and further circulation.
Both international law (Article 19 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights) and the US Constitution (1st Amendment) prohibit criminal punishment of those who report matters of public interest. Government and diplomatic embarrassment is not a threat to national security. It would be both unwise and of questionable legality to use the 1917 Espionage Act against WikiLeaks and other media who republish information leaked by whistleblowers. Over-interpreting the 1917 Espionage Act to authorize prosecution of non-government agents who simply receive and publish leaked classified information could have similar chilling results.
Prosecution of Wikileaks and its founder Julian Assange will degrade freedom of expression for all media, researchers and reporters, and set a terrible precedent that will be eagerly grasped by other governments, particularly those with a record of trying to ban, gag, stifle, muzzle or censor legitimate political reporting. The 1917 Act is frequently used to silence opposition. It criminalises criticism of the globalists’ war efforts, and sends dissenters to jail just for voicing their opinions. It transforms dissent into treason.
Here are two informational clips that may help analyse the objectives and motives behind the war logs and cablegate, Wikileaks, its founder Julian Assange. Make the clips viral; share far and wide http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAGTHRV_PJ0 ; and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeeTlufK3E4 .
It is sad that The New York Times, The Guardian UK, Der Speigel (Germany) and some other unprofessional and unethical media outfits manipulate and publish selective Wikileaks’ diplomatic cables in order to protect war criminals, liars, politicians and paymasters. That is one of the compelling reasons why Wikileaks must publish ALL unredacted US army war logs and official US government cables without any redaction or self-censorship and before ALL secrets and logs are unclassified. Wikileaks opens secrets expose double standards, bully diplomacy and unethical meddling in other countries. The leaks would help avert more enslavement.
Just watched The War You Don’t See on YouTube. Very informative documentary. Check it out.