Support NeoGAF

[Kevtones]

Non-headline. Are you fair and balancing CNN?

 

[Xe4]

You reap what you sow.

Look at it this way, if Trump destroys the US, it can't meddle in the election of other countries around the world anymore. He would retroactively viewed as a hero to the rest of the world.

You're right, now just China and the Russia will. That'll make the world a wonderful place!

I never understood the "you reap what you sow" argument here. Russia didn't hack the US because we did bad, they hacked the US because it would give them a geopolitical advantage. Our actions in other countries (the obvious exception of Russia, of course) had little to do with why they hacked us.

It is entirely possible to agree that what the US did was fucked up without simultaneously trying to say the country deserved being targeted by Russia.

 

[FlutterPuffs]

Non-headline. Are you fair and balancing CNN?

I dont see the problem with reminding people on this fact.

 

[Bleepey]

You reap what you sow.

Look at it this way, if Trump destroys the US, it can't meddle in the election of other countries around the world anymore. He would retroactively viewed as a hero to the rest of the world.

Jeremiah Wright Was urhhhh right. Chickens came home to roost. List is kind of small. I mean there is a lack of Congo there. Also why isn't the list in Alphabetical order? CNN fix your shit

 

[skullmuffins]

I was hesitant to state numbers because I only have some knowledge on the topic so I was conservative.

I can't fucking believe the callousness people are disregarding this with. "Ok", ugh.

I mean, I said "OK", but that doesn't mean I'm disregarding it. It's just not new news and I don't think it should stop us from being upset at the Russian interference.

 

[BocoDragon]

So is CNN trying to normalise this or what? "Look! It happens all the time!" That's the only implication I'm getting here, and it's a fucking stupid one.

If other countries are having their elections meddled in, that's a problem for those countries to detect and deal with. Just as the US should be dealing with Russia's potential meddling in their election.

I don't see how you could get that impression.

If anything CNN's agenda would be to present the Russian meddling as being as bad as possible. That's been their angle in the post-Trump era.

This kind of undermines their typical agenda so I dunno... maybe they just decided to tell the harsh truth even if it doesn't serve their anti-Trump / anti-Russian meddling stance?

 

[Kevtones]

I dont see the problem with reminding people on this fact.

They're in their right to report but the circumstances are so, so different. It's lazy headlining.

 

[Principate]

You're right, now just China and the USSR will. That'll make the world a wonderful place!

I never understood the "you reap what you sow" argument here. Russia didn't hack the US because we did bad, they hacked the US because it would give them a geopolitical advantage. Our actions in other countries (the obvious exception of Russia, of course) had little to do with why they hacked us.

Of course there's nothing good that can be gleaned from their actions which is why it should be thoroughly condemned.

The U.S. also interfered with these elections to give themselves a geopolitical advantage. Separate from the Russia issue that also should be condemned and insured that it doesn't happen again.

 

[Xe4]

If the list is so broad that they're going to include places like the UK, I'd like to know what their standards are. Problem?

Here's the study the numbers are based off of:
"Partisan electoral interventions by the great powers: Introducing the PEIG Dataset." Dov H. Levin. Conflict Management and Peace Science . First published date: September-19-2016
10.1177/0738894216661190

Of course there's nothing good that can be gleaned from their actions which is why it should be thoroughly condemned.

The U.S. also interfered with these elections to give themselves a geopolitical advantage. Separate from the Russia issue that also should be condemned and insured that it doesn't happen again.

Agreed. The US isn't perfect, I'll be the first to admit it. But I will disagree strongly with anyone who uses the US actions as a reason for why we got hacked, or an excuse for what Russia did.

 

[psychowave]

Lol at the people trying to downplay this

 

[Yazan]

San Marino? I need to know more.

 

[the_id]

Gotta protect FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY and HUMAN Rights as well as our Capitalist interests.

 

[GYODX]

I'd like to see the threshold criteria for "meddling" please and how it compares to Russia's actions.

Abetting the assassination of leftist politicians a good enough threshold for you?

 

[Xe4]

Abetting the assassination of leftist politicians a good enough threshold for you?

Assassinations are not what was being counted. This involved nonviolent interventions only.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You reap what you sow.

Look at it this way, if Trump destroys the US, it can't meddle in the election of other countries around the world anymore. He would retroactively viewed as a hero to the rest of the world.

Nope

 

[Any Questions]

There once was a whole thread which ran for well over a decade.

Interesting. Will go and have a search later

 

[Palette Swap]

I can't fully get behind the "you reap what you sow" thinking, not because America hasn't had a record of awful foreign policy and severely fucked up parts of the world, it has.
What bothers me I guess, is that there's an implication of causality, and quite frankly, when it comes to meddling with other states, Russia is the last great avenger I'd want.

If there's karma in all this, it's that parts of the American opinion were primed for decades to accept bullshit and half-truths because they've grown accustomed to mistaking ignorance, bigotry and lies for freedom of speech.

 

[Kevtones]

Lol at the people trying to downplay this

Our own country working with an enemy to sabotage our own democracy. That's the issue.

 

[Acorn]

Indeed. But how many of them have led to an election victory of an idiot?

Chile says sup!? Franco says sup!?

 

[Anticol]

Indeed. But how many of them have led to an election victory of an idiot?

The US has to improve its education system, the ignorance is palpable in this guy.

Fyi, at least Trump is not assassinating the american youth.

 

[*Splinter]

I don't see how you could get that impression.

If anything CNN's agenda would be to present the Russian meddling as being as bad as possible. That's been their angle in the post-Trump era.

This kind of undermines their typical agenda so I dunno... maybe they just decided to tell the harsh truth even if it doesn't serve their anti-Trump / anti-Russian meddling stance?

That's kinda my point, this whole thing seems counter productive and it's not even "new" news, they've gone out of their way to report on this and for what?

Chichikov makes a good point about educating people while the effects of meddling are being felt at home, but this still seems like a poor way of doing that. How does the average voter even begin to combat something that seemingly happens all the time?

 

[double jump]

CNN out here dry snitching.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Who would have imagined that extraordinary concentration of wealth and power could lead to very bad things?

What America has done (and continues to do very likely) is horrible.

And it is just as horrible that the innocent citizens of America have to be subjected to the same shit.

This sort of interference is indefensible when we do it to others, as well as when it is done to us.

 

[Kyoufu]

I mean, I said "OK", but that doesn't mean I'm disregarding it. It's just not new news and I don't think it should stop us from being upset at the Russian interference.

It's not supposed to stop you or anyone else from being upset about Russia's interference in the 2016 election. It's simply a reminder that meddling in other countries' affairs can lead to disastrous results. if anything, this should highlight the threat America faces from its adversaries and how important and concerning the topic actually is. Maybe seeing what has happened in other countries can get people to care about it happening on their own turf.

 

[*Splinter]

Abetting the assassination of leftist politicians a good enough threshold for you?

When did this happen in the UK?

Do you know what "threshold" means?

 

[Kin5290]

You reap what you sow.

Look at it this way, if Trump destroys the US, it can't meddle in the election of other countries around the world anymore. He would retroactively viewed as a hero to the rest of the world.

True, if Trump destroys the US, the rest of the world won't have to worry about American election meddling anymore.

They'd have bigger things to worry about with the foundation of the global economy collapsing under their feet, after all.

 

[fr0st]

You reap what you sow.

Look at it this way, if Trump destroys the US, it can't meddle in the election of other countries around the world anymore. He would retroactively viewed as a hero to the rest of the world.

weSmart

 

[ponpo]

If people watch the video, the guy says these instances include both covert and overt methods, the overt ones being as simple as supporting a candidate openly. I don't think it's fair to call something like that "meddling in an election" but whatever.

 

[hobblygobbly]

For those curious as to know when U.S meddled in Russia, it was in the 90s after the dissolution of the USSR.

The 2016 election meddling by Russia is them applying the same tactics the U.S did in the 1996 Russian election just with better means (i.e social media/internet).

1. U.S politicians meeting in secret with Yeltsin's campaign and the oligarchy backing Yeltsin.
2. U.S funding Yeltsin's campaign.
3. U.S had American "advisers" in Russia helping Yeltsin and influencing opinion, such as Clinton's former aide that had direct communication to the president.
4. These "advisers" helped Yeltsin's campaign in the dissemination of fake information (from pamphlets to videos like mini-documentaries on TV/radio), lies about other candidates (including "simple" things like spreading fake dates for their rallies), etc.

 

[Charles Brandon]

Hmmm.

Define 'meddled'. What did they do in the UK?

 

[BocoDragon]

For those curious as to know when U.S meddled in Russia, it was in the 90s after the dissolution of the USSR.

The 2016 election meddling by Russia is them applying the same tactics the U.S did in the 1996 Russian election just with better means (i.e social media/internet).

1. U.S politicians meeting in secret with Yeltsin's campaign and the oligarchy backing Yeltsin.
2. U.S funding Yeltsin's campaign.
3. U.S had American "advisers" in Russia helping Yeltsin and influencing opinion, such as Clinton's former aide that had direct communication to the president (Clinton).
4. These "advisers" helped Yeltsin's campaign in the dissemination of fake information (from pamphlets to documentaries), lies about other candidates (including "simple" things like spreading fake dates for their rallies), etc.

That's actually very interesting.

The prevailing 'wisdom' around Russia's interference is "even if they can't install a pro-Russian candidate, at least they can undermine faith in democracy, undermine faith in facts, and bring the US down to the level of distrust in government and society that they have in Russia".

But maybe it's just "well, the US did it first. Revenge".

 

[ponpo]

For those wondering about the definition, it's in the OP guy's paper titled Partisan electoral interventions by the great powers: Introducing the PEIG Dataset

A partisan electoral intervention is defined in PEIG as a situation in which one or more sovereign countries intentionally undertakes specific actions to influence an upcoming election in another sovereign country in an overt or covert manner which they believe will favor or hurt one of the sides contesting that election and which incurs, or may incur, significant costs to the intervener(s) or the intervened country. This definition was chosen in order to capture, as closely as possible, the phenomenon commonly referred to when partisan electoral interventions are publicly discussed, proposed and/or denounced.

In order to be coded as an electoral intervention, the acts done by the intervener required an affirmative answer to two questions: (1) was the act intentionally done in order to help or hurt one of the sides contesting the election for the executive; and (2) did the act clearly carry significant costs that were either (a) immediate (cost of subsidizing the preferred candidate s campaign/a covert intervention) and/or (b) longer-term/potential (loss of prestige/credibility if a public intervention fails and/or long-term damage to the relations once act is done or exposed).

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

I'll say it. So fucking what?

I mean that, is this in attempt to normalize and/or undermine 2016? If so, get fucked. This is basically, Trump saying we do bad stuff too. No shit.

America has done heinous, wretched, and utterly vile things in the past and current. Does that mean we should be like, okay okay you can do it to? No fuck that. This is such BS, its like a child playing in the sandbox. You did this so therefore you shouldn't care when I do that. What a joke. Fuck CNN for trying to grab headlines on this. WTG, give em a talking point.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

It was all for the greater good.

 

[BocoDragon]

I'll say it. So fucking what?

I mean that, is this in attempt to normalize and/or undermine 2016? If so, get fucked. This is basically, Trump saying we do bad stuff too. No shit.

America has done heinous, wretched, and utterly vile things in the past and current. Does that mean we should be like, okay okay you can do it to? No fuck that. This is such BS, its like a child playing in the sandbox. You did this so therefore you shouldn't care when I do that. What a joke. Fuck CNN for trying to grab headlines on this. WTG, give em a talking point.

^ Some people really want one-sided agenda media which only presents stories in service of particular goals... wow.

 

[Real Hero]

I'll say it. So fucking what?

I mean that, is this in attempt to normalize and/or undermine 2016? If so, get fucked. This is basically, Trump saying we do bad stuff too. No shit.

America has done heinous, wretched, and utterly vile things in the past and current. Does that mean we should be like, okay okay you can do it to? No fuck that. This is such BS, its like a child playing in the sandbox. You did this so therefore you shouldn't care when I do that. What a joke. Fuck CNN for trying to grab headlines on this. WTG, give em a talking point.

So what? Not a fan of history I take it.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

^ Some people really want one-sided agenda media which only presents stories in service of particular goals... wow.

Go on.

So what? Not a fan of history I take it.

You got me, I hate history, its the reason I went to school for it and teach it. I hate it.

 

[ISOM]

So what? Not a fan of history I take it.

I'm more of a fan of context. Doing this type of history lesson in the current climate and controversies seems negligent at best and conspiratorial at worst.

 

[Oersted]

No taking responsibility is the best way to combat this shit happening. Right now your government does some heinous shit, no one knows or understands the scope of it til ten years later, then everyone has this attitude 'well I'm not responsible'. Nothing happens to those involved. People forget. Rinse and repeat.

I didn't speak out against responsibility, actually. I just pointed out what you are responsible for.

It is your responsibility to call out heinous shit and make sure something happens to those responsible for heinous shit, you are correct in that.

 

[Real Hero]

Go on.



You got me, I hate history, its the reason I went to school for it and teach it. I hate it.

Then what's the big deal, do you really think people will see it and think 'well I guess it is ok if they do it to me then!' I doubt it

 

[Madao]

lol. they've meddled so bad with my country that it's listed 2 times.

 

[BocoDragon]

Go on.

You don't want them posting a true story because you don't like what it implies politically. You're worried about it giving the other side "a talking point" more than you care about it being a true story.

That's an instinct that is bad for news media if we actually want it to tell the truth.

CNN is already looked at as a centre-left shill. Publishing a story like this against the grain of anti-Trump/anti-Russian meddling is actually way out of character for them. And you're not having it? I guess we want partisan media, suppressing certain stories and uplifting others to fit certain agendas?

 

[cheezcake]

I'm more of a fan of context. Doing this type of history lesson in the current climate and controversies seems negligent at best and conspiratorial at worst.

The truth is negligent at best, conspiratorial at worst

You're going down the same rabbit hole the republican propaganda machine's bore over the last half century.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

Then what's the big deal, do you really think people will see it and think 'well I guess it is ok if they do it to me then!' I doubt it

So why quote me and why say, not a fan of history? I mean if that was your take away.

I don't think there is any doubt that was the entire purpose of the segment, it was an attempt to show hey guys we do it too. Which is BS, on various levels, but w/e.

You don't want them posting a true story because you don't like what it implies politically. You're worried about it giving the other side "a talking point" more than you care about it being a true story.

I have zero issue with them posting a true story. What I have an issue with is sensationalism to pull in clicks and viewers. This is void of any context at all, you know that.

I really don't desire to get into a debate concerning foreign policy and the desires of nations to prop up candidates, but I I'll go on record saying there is a colossal difference between 2016 and the vast majority of shit the U.S. has pulled. That isn't American exceptionalism either.

This was a blatant attempt to normalize 2016 and the play it both sides shit. Fuck em.

 

[Pandy]

Hmmm.

Define 'meddled'. What did they do in the UK?

Probably something to do with socialists in the 60s/70s.

Supply of arms to the IRA over a period of decades.

As the recent release of historic cabinet papers shows, lots of stuff is covered up simply due to it being politically embarrassing. If the US was ever complicit in that to support the government of the day, that would count in my book.

Governments mess with governments in other countries the whole time. The US, UK, Russia, and China probably more so than most since WW2. In the social media age the bar for 'meddling' just got a lot lower.

 

[Gnome]

I mean, okay, we did those things. We shouldn't have, and we shouldn't do them anymore. And those countries have every right to be upset with the U.S. like we are with Russia. There isn't really any other response to this that isn't pulling for some left/right agenda.

I don't really want to watch a video, but did they actually have some substantial point to make?

 

[BocoDragon]

I have zero issue with them posting a true story. What I have an issue with is sensationalism to pull in clicks and viewers. This is void of any context at all, you know that.

Okay I can see that concern.

Is this actually a clickbait-driven topic though? Seems to me that it's actually rare moment of CNN playing "devil's advocate" in contradiction to their usual critical coverage of the Russian hacking story.

Is it really an out of nowhere story?.... or is it just that after 6 months of harping on Russian meddling, they gave a minute to address the (true) claims that the US has done it too.

Maybe the reason the OP posted it here is clickbait though! could be

I really don't desire to get into a debate concerning foreign policy and the desires of nations to prop up candidates, but I I'll go on record saying there is a colossal difference between 2016 and the vast majority of shit the U.S. has pulled. That isn't American exceptionalism either.

This was a blatant attempt to normalize 2016 and the play it both sides shit. Fuck em.

Oh I agree. In the sense that what the US has done is way worse. Literally planning and sponsoring actual coups. Not in all the cases on this big list, but in several of them (Chile, Iran, Guatamala, etc).

But I agree that I don't want to get bogged down into a deep foreign policy debate tonight

 

[bernardobri]

 

[Suikoguy]

I'm more of a fan of context. Doing this type of history lesson in the current climate and controversies seems negligent at best and conspiratorial at worst.

Yeah, some of the interventions were indefensible, however the context of the situation matters in many of them.

Are some people arguing that we should have done nothing to counter actions the USSR was taking?

 

[TheUzukiLives]

Go on

Well for one this isn't info that the average Joe would know, so it's a good starting point to educate folks on how meddling with other country's politics is a bad thing and has lead to more harm and good. It would be a good way to get folks riled up on why this whole Russian collision thing is a big deal.

But then again the people that probably need this info the most are the ones screaming FAKE NEWS at CNN and we should all just be bitter and cynical about it, because we already know this.