Clinton Campaign's Cozy Press Relationship

1. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   This articles was publish Oct 9 2016.
   
   "INTERNAL STRATEGY DOCUMENTS and emails among Clinton staffers shed light on friendly and highly useful relationships between the campaign and various members of the U.S. media, as well as the campaign’s strategies for manipulating those relationships.
   
   The emails were provided to The Intercept by the source identifying himself as Guccifer 2.0, who was reportedly responsible for prior significant hacks, including one that targeted the Democratic National Committee and resulted in the resignations of its top four officials. On Friday, Obama administration officials claimed that Russia’s “senior-most officials” were responsible for that hack and others, although they provided no evidence for that assertion.
   
   As these internal documents demonstrate, a central component of the Clinton campaign strategy is ensuring that journalists they believe are favorable to Clinton are tasked to report the stories the campaign wants circulated.
   
   At times, Clinton’s campaign staff not only internally drafted the stories they wanted published but even specified what should be quoted “on background” and what should be described as “on the record.”
   
   One January 2015 strategy document — designed to plant stories on Clinton’s decision-making process about whether to run for president — singled out reporter Maggie Haberman, then of Politico, now covering the election for the New York Times, as a “friendly journalist” who has “teed up” stories for them in the past and “never disappointed” them. Nick Merrill, the campaign press secretary, produced the memo, according to the document metadata:"
   *  https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09/exc … ationship/
   
   I believe that politically motivated fake media is fake media with an agenda other than reporting the news.
   
   Research that article for yourself.  Dig in!
   Added:  Still no evidence of Russian hacking.
   
   Zero FOX reporters.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Quilligrapherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Some people excel at making themselves look foolish.
      
      The OP and the Russian propaganda apparatus are at it again. This time, they are trying to make normal activities seem like sinister skulduggery. Every day activities in every corporation, organization, and political party looking for publicity are portrayed as evil. What the OP and the Russians call "planting stories," public relations professionals call normal and necessary press releases.
      
      "A press release is a short, compelling news story written by a public relations professional and sent to targeted members of the media. The goal of a press release is to pique the interest of a journalist or publication. The press release should contain all the essential information (who? what? where? when? how? and most importantly why?) for the journalist to easily produce his own story.
      
      The Small Business Encyclopedia defines press releases -- also known as news releases -- as 'brief, printed statements that outline the major facts of a news story in journalistic style.' A press release should read like a news story, written in third-person, citing quotes and sources and containing standard press release information. [Ed: Bold type and underlines added for educational purposes.] {1}
      
      As you can see, it's really easy to look foolish when you don't take the time to learn about your subject matter.
      
      {1} https://money.howstuffworks.com/busines … -work1.htm

      replyreport
   2. 0

      ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Anyone , anyone  , who cannot now see the Clinton , DNC  , mainstream media collusion and ownership all through the last campaigns , primaries , election cycles , conspiracies in , of and by the US Government  varied  Offices of the D.O.J.  and   Supreme Courts -- and  through the mainstream media itself for the last ten years plus ..............For the total benefit and the complete  success of the Hilary  Clinton presidential bid ?
      
      Is blind to political and media reality .
      
      
      NOW , the   Trump dossier  WAS A GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED  SMEAR CAMPAIGN against a fair election , Created , supported , maintained and operated by people WITHIN  the U.S.  government offices .
      -Hilary herself
      -Atty Eric Holder
      -Atty  Lynch
      -DNC -Wassermann-Shultz
      -John Pedesta
      -and many others  should all now be under indictment .
      
      The O.P. is totally right .

      replyreport
      1. 79

         colorfuloneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I wonder if those journalists that were wined and dined on Clinton's campaign funds were all CIA or other government agents like was revealed in the JFK Files (about 40)?   Geeze, the twists and turns! 
         
         "During college, Anderson Cooper spent two summers as an intern at the Central Intelligence Agency." ~ Wikileaks

         replyreport
         1. 0

            ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Yet , it all seems pretty quiet out there  on the liberals side of things ,  How quickly all of the Never Trumper's sooo  offended  up to now ,  have apparently and conveniently crawled under the rocks of silence and so deniability once again . 
            
            Of course if Hilary wanted to temporarily hide all her own past treasonous behavior , what better plan than to accuse Trump of  acts of collusion with Ole' Puttie .
            
            All would have been forgotten had she won ----poor Hilary.

            replyreport
2. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   "When you make up a fake scandal, you never really know where its going to go."
   
   Tucker Carlson said that the Democrats and left-wing media's repeated claims of Trump-Russia collusion have snowballed into "hysteria" that may have "unintended consequences" for them.

   replyreport
3. 56

   Paul Wingerposted 7 years ago

   Who cares?

   replyreport
4. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   Well, someone must want to make someone else look foolish once again.  I don't take things personally that people like you say, its not in my nature to do so.  And, I realize that most of the time with people like that its really a reflection on them self, it has nothing to do with me whatsoever.  Its cognitive dissidence.  Simple logic tells me I can't take that personal, or even seriously.
   
   Maybe I will consider a more formal reply, but honestly I'm tired of the personal attacks on me, repeatedly by Quill.  It is a waste of my good time.  Get a life!

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Quilligrapherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      A colleague of ours posted a fake-news article that was the product of a hacker known as Guccifer 2.0, who was mentioned in the piece as the source. A number of U.S. Intelligence Agencies have connected Guccifer 2.0 to a series of cyberattacks on the Democratic National Committee (DNC) by two Russian intelligence groups. {1}{2}{3}{4}{5}{6} 
      
      Therefore, we know that this thread was a deliberate effort to spread the lies from a Russian cyber program designed to undermine a candidate running for president of the United States. This thread was meant to continue a smear campaign of a foreign government working to interfere in our democratic processes.
      
      I dared to post facts challenging the thread's ludicrous implications that candidate Clinton's usual and customary public relations activities were somehow nefarious:
      "The OP and the Russian propaganda apparatus are at it again," I said. "This time, they are trying to make normal activities seem like sinister skulduggery..."
      
      Naturally, one would think the thread originator would be prepared to defend the topic of the post with facts and/or intelligent arguments. Wrong.
      
      Instead, the reply begins, "Well, someone must want to make someone else look foolish once again.  I don't take things personally that people like you say, its not in my nature to do so.  And, I realize that most of the time with people like that its really a reflection on them self, it has nothing to do with me whatsoever.  Its cognitive dissidence.  Simple logic tells me I can't take that personal, or even seriously."
      
      Notice how the thread topic is ignored, no justification is offered for intentionally spreading fake news in this forum, and there is an immediate pivot to faux indignation and a false claim of a personal attack. There is even a bit of psycho-babble to further deflect the discussion away from the distortions in the thread's opening statement. How much easier it would have been to simply say the article posted was a distortion of reality. It would have been refreshing to see a response that actually contained facts that support all the fake assertions made. Instead, we see the same old claim of being picked on that we have seen so many times before.
      
      Press releases are normal, not sinister. On Jan. 26, 2017, the North Carolina GOP distributed a press release to friendly media outlets that lambasted the state's governor:
      "RALEIGH, NC— Yesterday morning, hours before the North Carolina legislature began their long session, newly installed Governor Roy Cooper released a blog entry where he attempted to generate enthusiasm with the public about his agenda. Unfortunately for him, people were able to see through the facade that Cooper has meticulously groomed over the years."{7}
      
      This is this stuff public relations professionals are paid to do. The DNC does it; the RNC does it; and president Donald Trump did it when he dictated the phony cover story for junior's June 2016 meeting with the Russians.
      
      {1} Shieber, Jonathan; Conger, Kate. "Did Russian government hackers leak the DNC emails?". TechCrunch.  https://techcrunch.com/2016/07/26/russia-dnc-hack/
      {2} "Spy Agency Consensus Grows That Russia Hacked D.N.C.". New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/us/p … d-dnc.html
      {3} Rid, Thomas. "All Signs Point to Russia Being Behind the DNC Hack". Motherboard. https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/arti … e-dnc-hack
      {4} "Wikileaks posts nearly 20,000 hacked DNC emails online". Providence Journal. http://www.providencejournal.com/news/2 … ils-online
      {5} "DNC email leak: Sanders calls for new leader as Clinton camp blames Russia". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 … dnc-emails
      {6} "DNC email leak: Russian hackers Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear behind breach". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ … guccifer-2
      {7} http://us2.campaign-archive.com/?u=f310 … fd7431d6b1

      replyreport
5. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   Yeah, I heard about all that....there are lots of lies, and the biggest ones get started by none other than Hillary Clinton.  She's going down.
   
   CNN LABELED TRUMP A ‘CONSPIRACY THEORIST’ FOR SUGGESTING DEMS FUNDED ‘PEEGATE’ DOSSIER
   And Trump was proven completely right, again!
   *  https://www.infowars.com/cnn-labeled-tr … e-dossier/

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Quilligrapherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I see your posts are still avoiding the topic of your own thread. None of your replies include a single fact to support the fake news in the opening statement. Ah, but you already know that. Discussing and strategizing press releases by Mrs. Clinton's staff is normal during an election campaign, not suspicious! The effort being made to avoid admitting the truth is as obvious as the fake news itself!
      

      replyreport
      1. 79

         colorfuloneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I'm not having any form of conversation with you, because it doesn't seem to be what you are actually seeking.  Go snare a rabbit.
         Have a nice life!
         Go Trump!

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Quilligrapherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I know, I know. You say that every time someone points out your posts are full of fake news and false facts. We have all seen this performance before.
            
            I am not calling for the end of the conversation. I truly want to have a conversation, a conversation about truth. Yet, each time members of this forum prove a post is false, we see a pivot to change the topic, we see indignation followed by a declaration to cut off the conversation, and we watch the blame being shifted to the people who really want a dialogue about what is true and what is not.
            
            The opening statement of this thread is a false narrative, pure Russian propaganda, designed to impact the results of the 2016 election. Its purpose is to distort reality. I did not choose this topic but I am willing to discuss what is not true. 
            
            Keeping with the topic of this thread, here is a link to all of the press releases planned, discussed, created and distributed by the Trump organization. I thought it might lead to a new thread about "Trump Campaign's Cozy Press Relationship."{1}
            
            Me bad! I hope you have a very pleasant day.
            

            replyreport
6. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   To a gentleman, from a lady...please stop. I feel harassed by you. I do not want any interaction with you in the HubPages forums. Please respect my request. 
   I have blessed days.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Quilligrapherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Madam, with all due respect, please stay on topic. Forums are for discussion and not for posting propaganda. If you don't want to discuss the innuendo and falsehoods in your own opening statement, that's fine.
      

      replyreport
   2. 70

      VanessaJanesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Is  that considered to be harassment? Very politely pointing out how your assertions are untrue?
      
      I wrote a press release today about my business. Does that mean I have a cozy relationship with the media? No, it means I am informing them of something in the hopes they will report on it.
      
      Your claim of being harassed is bizarre. Do you think people should not respond to you on a public forum? Are you not here to have conversations? If not, why are you here? I'm new here but I have participated in many forums over the years and his responses to you are quite tame. Why do you post, if not to engage in debate?

      replyreport
7. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   Hugs! (edited)
   
   

   replyreport
8. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   I didn't read your whole post.
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 70

      VanessaJanesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      [Shrug]
      
      I guess you are here to preach, not engage.

      replyreport
9. 79

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   Guessing.
   Blessings!

   replyreport