Has anyone wondered why obvious fake news outlets like CNN and NPR were not listed on the fake professor’s fake news list that is being distributed at Harvard? Probably because they are promoted as being credible despite clear evidence that they don’t just make errors (something that virtually every news outlet does, but often will seek to correct), but they actually fabricate stories. Now, Wikileaks has exposed NPR as peddling fake news to the public. It should come as no surprise to those paying attention.
In reporting on documents of newly-elected French President Emmanuel Macron, NPR tweeted, “Wikileaks posted 9 gigabytes of Macron’s campaign data, which is said to include both real and fake documents.”
Wikileaks posted 9 gigabytes of Macron's campaign data, which is said to include both real and fake documents.https://t.co/ib5V8qfsKs
— NPR (@NPR) May 6, 2017
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
There was just one glaring problem with their report: Wikileaks had nothing to do with the leak, and Wikileaks was the first to call them out on their fake news.
NPR is not a credible news organization.
1) WikiLeaks did not publish #MacronLeaks
2) So far only Macron claims "fake docs"–but names none— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) May 6, 2017
“NPR is not a credible news organization,” the Wikileaks tweet read. “1) WikiLeaks did not publish #MacronLeaks 2) So far only Macron claims “fake docs”–but names none.”
Still, it took NPR an hour to respond.
“Thank you for clarifying. We have updated our post to correct the implication.”
A bit later on, NPR “Clarification: NPR cannot confirm who originally uploaded the leaked documents to the Internet.”
NPR wrote a correction of the article.
“A previous version of this post incorrectly implied that WikiLeaks was first to post the documents. NPR cannot confirm who originally uploaded the leaked documents to the Internet,” read the correction. “WikiLeaks says that it has been working to confirm the authenticity of the documents.”
NPR went on to tweet, “Clarification: NPR cannot confirm who originally uploaded the leaked documents to the Internet.”
Clarification: NPR cannot confirm who originally uploaded the leaked documents to the Internet.
— NPR (@NPR) May 6, 2017
Wikileaks then responded, “That’s ‘retraction’ or ‘correction’ NPR–not ‘clarification’ –and normally followed by an apology for misleading 7M people.”
Interestingly enough, the New Yorker got the story correct.
“Shortly before 3 p.m., an anonymous 4chan user posted nine gigabytes of information—purportedly hacked e-mails, photographs, and internal documents from the campaign of Emmanuel Macron. Posobiec could not know whether all the information was authentic—he didn’t even have time to glance through most of the thousands of pages—but he considered it his journalistic duty to let his followers know about the leak. ‘Massive doc dump at /pol/,’ he tweeted. He included a link to the 4chan post, along with a hashtag: #MacronLeaks.”
Twitter erupted in a flurry of shots at NPR.
One user tweeted, That was not a problem with clarity. That was straight up misinformation.”
Another user asked, “What is your basis for attribution to Wikileaks?”
Still another wrote, “Crickey NPR, I usually think the world of u. Do better research. #Macronleaks weren’t released by Wikileaks. This is embarrassing 4 u.”
Several others tweeted, “False. Retract and apologize to @Wikileaks,” “You are #fakenews,” and “NPR is CLUELESS. Wikileaks did not post the documents. Does everyone see the undeniable #Fakenews??? NPR=FakeNews.”
I doubt we’re going to see either NPR or CNN in a new list of fake news by the fake professor and they will continue to promote themselves as the “Ministry of Truth,” but it is telling that so many of these alleged “credible” outlets, which are corporately owned spread fake news and propaganda while smaller outlets get far more truth out to the people than they do.
