CNN refused to broadcast President Donald Trump's White House address on Thursday, July 16, after his "history of false statements."

After the move, CNN was hit with a wave of backlash from viewers as many found the move to be a form of censorship. On X, one person wrote, "Unbelievable and unacceptable, no more 'objectivity' CNN has no credibility……all news outlets should air any President live AND LET THEIR VIEWERS DECIDE THEIR OWN OPINIONS OF LIVE PRESIDENTS NATIONAL ADDRESSES."

all 63 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 162 points 3 months ago (4 children)

"On X, one person wrote"

Come on guys...

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 63 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah, modern journalism really seems to boil down to “what is Twitter posting about today?”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 99 points 3 months ago (16 children)

    “Unbelievable and unacceptable, no more ‘objectivity’ CNN has no credibility……all news outlets should air any President live AND LET THEIR VIEWERS DECIDE THEIR OWN OPINIONS OF LIVE PRESIDENTS NATIONAL ADDRESSES.”

    But these same assholes cheer when Obama is ignored and Biden's speech isn't broadcast.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 87 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    If the viewers had the ability to discern propaganda and fake news from legitimate information, we would not have Trump as president.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 30 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    If we had a unbiased, functional 4th estate we would not have Trump as president. Treating made up bullshit as "alternate facts" is partially why we are where we are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (8 children)

    Nothing is ever unbiased. Nobody should ever assume it is. This is what allowed the 4th estate to fail. But yeah their failure was egregious.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Right, but we used to have this thing called the Ombudsman whose entire job was striving to be unbiased.

    They did away with them years ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    I don't disagree, which for us is sometimes ironic. But I would like to emphasize and contrast your own words striving, not being. The sad truth is, even with the best intentions. We can't avoid or counter what we are unaware of. Even without malice.

    But, everyone should absolutely strive to be as unbiased as they can. And at the same time understand that there is only so much they can. As opposed to what we have now. Which is almost completely sensationalized, poorly framed, and often purposefully incomplete.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 months ago* (5 children)

    I'll make sure to give your opinion all the consideration it deserves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Extremely passive aggressive comment. But do what you need to. Outlets have always used things like omission, framing etc to shape opinion. The fact that there are so few now with even fewer owners has only exacerbated the issue. Understanding an outlets bias will help you identify that framing or intuit what was omitted. It should be a basic understanding every person should have. It's the only real check that would keep the outfits as honest as possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    You seem to be very intent on lecturing rather than discussing. I am not interested.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    If you want discussion discuss. You are the one lecturing. Do you have an issue with what I've said? Please explain it let's discuss. You don't have to be passive aggressive lecturing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    You are not a professor. Lemmy is not your classroom. People here are not your students. Not a single one of us is required to read or respond when you bloviate. Nor do we have to entertain your ridiculous attempt to redefine common words like 'lecture' for your convenience.

    On Lemmy and nearly everywhere else in life, adults can choose to ignore you completely. Please refer to this message as needed when there is no response to additional comments.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago

    So much of this is just the result of turnout. And so much of turnout hinges on how efficiently the campaigns operated.

    The big difference between Obama, Hillary, Biden, and Harris is who knew how to organize the machinery to get their supporters to the polls in the highest numbers and who didn't.

    After that, you're just living in a country where 45% of the voting base consistently goes with the most naked fascist on the ballot, because they've been programmed to hate hate hate outsiders. And if you can't juice enough of the remaining 55%, fascism is what you get.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    sort of, "Give me both sides of the argument and I'll decide for myself which one is right." That only works if both sides are at least trying to be accurate and thruthful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Thats kind of like one of my former coworkers who would always tout he's one of the most informed people because he reads "both sides". And by that, it meant he'd look at articles posted to the libertarian forums, then glance at the headlines of something he doesn't agree with.

    His car radio is tuned in to focks nooz

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 46 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    They shoulda done a 5 min broadcast delay and run a fact-checking effort as pop-up video.

    And a running count of proved-falsehoods.

    Maybe a "minutes saying false things", a "minutes saying true things", and a "minutes not talking"; but the last one will be stuck at 0.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Sign language girl in one bottom corner, fact checker calling out every lie on the other corner

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    That takes effort, energy, talent, concern, and integrity so you wouldn't really expect to see that on CNN.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago

    Infowars: Curremt.leader and president of the pedophiles is lying here, reports from strait of hormuz say ships not paying US fees to pass through.

    Vice president of the pedophiles unavailable for comment, currently on holiday on unknown private island.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    CNN sucks, but a broken clock is, indeed, correct twice a day. They aren't wrong here.

    Again, fuck them, though. They aren't our allies. They side with the chucklefucks committing genocide and prostrsting themselves to Trump and his allies in fear.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 33 points 3 months ago

    First of all, it's about time. I've been screaming that they should cut off the media oxygen to these Traitors since Kelly Anne Cryptkeeper started spewing her alternative facts early in the first dictatorship.

    Second of all, too little too late CNN. This is just your last gasp before Ellison CBSs you, and turns you into another reliable mouthpiece for the Conservative Propaganda Machine.

    BTW, CBS showed the speech, and gave it a substatial debrief afterwords.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    This is actually pretty awesome. Major news channels not airing a freaking presidential address because even they know no good can come from him opening his ugly lying mouth.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago

    Imagine if they’d done this in 2015.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Free market, bitch! If he wants to buy the air time, he can. No one stopped him from giving the speech and no one stopped the channels that aired it from doing so. That ain't censorship.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    Magas have never been able to understand the concept that freedom of speech doesn't obligate any entity to platform whatever it is you are saying.

    Ever since 2020 it's been "How do you know conservatives are being silenced? Because they never stop telling you."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago

    “Don’t print lies in the newspaper” is one of the first rules of journalism.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    the same 'lack of' federal regulations that allows fox news to spew the bullshit and lies that they have for decades, is the same that allows cnn to not broadcast the dipshit's speechespolitical ramblings.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    history of false statements bad ratings

    Like CNN has ever had a problem airing out a professional liar's bullshit.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    You're actually saying trump doesn't get ratings/attention?

    That's astoundingly out of touch, if so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    And they were right on the spot.

    Although, I have to admit, Trump's lies are easy to spot. He only needs to open his mouth or type something...

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Haha cry harder maga babies!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    More please.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Perhaps they expect they're all getting laid off once the Paramount deal closes, so they might as well.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Anyone who has been keeping an eye on the activities of the blatant Russian state sponsored bots on social media knows this already.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Their own options are wrong. How can you agree with factually false statements and lies with no evidence to back up claims.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Tel Aviv Don?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Heh. Excellent.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    CNN refused to broadcast President Donald Trump's White House address on Thursday, July 16, after his "history of false statements."

    Bullshit. What's the real reason, CNN? Because you've been covering for Trump and sane washing his BS for years.

  • source
  • [+] -25 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (8 children)

    Sounds like this time he's babbled something truthful CNN handlers don't want to air

    Edit obligatory reddit thanks for the reverse gold. If you couldn't get it, this was a very anti trump comment and I'm surprised Lemmy isn't having it. See thread for details: he'd been saying elections are rigged but because that's how he's "won" , not against him

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    So your belief is CNN got the transcript of what someone who refuses to follow scripts would say before he said it, and refused to air it because they knew that CNN, had something to do with checks notes outside countries having influence over U.S. elections with no instances being pointed to, and no arrests made for performing them. Also no warrants for arrests...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    The closest thing he got to telling the truth is that China got ahold of voter data... because voter data is public information.

    I got voter data for my area for 2020, seriously, just ask the elections department.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment