Sexual harassment accusations against Charlie Rose and Glenn Thrush feed the ‘fake news’ narrative

[Dashinka 24,793]

By Callum Borchers By Callum Borchers

The Fix

Analysis

November 20 at 5:44 PM

 

Sexual harassment accusations leveled against journalists Charlie Rose and Glenn Thrush on Monday portray both men as predators — and something else, too: fakers.

Behind Rose's dignified image, cultivated over decades on PBS, is a groping exhibitionist, according to women who told The Washington Post's Irin Carmon and Amy Brittain about their experiences working for him. Vox reported that Thrush, a White House correspondent for the New York Times, masks a penchant for unwanted advances under the facade of a mentor.

While this is hardly the most important consideration at a time when more and more women are coming forward with accounts of predatory behavior by men in power, it is worth noting a negative side effect of the allegations against Rose, Thrush and other prominent media figures such as former NPR top editor Mike Oreskes and former ABC politics director Mark Halperin: The notion that these men successfully misled many colleagues and the public about their true natures feeds the “fake news” narrative pushed by President Trump, U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore and others.

 

If they were fake in the way they presented themselves, the reasoning goes, maybe they were fake in their reporting, too. Maybe lots of reporting is fake.

[Eight women say Charlie Rose sexually harassed them — with nudity, groping and lewd calls]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/11/20/sexual-harassment-accusations-against-charlie-rose-and-glenn-thrush-feed-the-fake-news-narrative/?utm_term=.66ccca640388

[bcking 3,157]

If Trump has a laundry list of verifiable lies that he has said over the years in public and on twitter...

Then maybe he is lying when he denies the sexual assault allegations and claims his bragging is just "locker room talk"?

 

It's a slippery slope, and can apply to just about anything.

 

If Roy Moore is lying about his penchant for underage girls, then maybe he is lying about his political ideologies etc...

Edited November 21, 2017 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I fully expected when someone posted about Manson dying for there to be 15 follow up posts about Trump. Trump is like the universal blood donor. It works for the unhinged left to deflect anything.

[bcking 3,157]

6 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I fully expected when someone posted about Manson dying for there to be 15 follow up posts about Trump. Trump is like the universal blood donor. It works for the unhinged left to deflect anything.

There is a difference between deflecting, and applying an opinion more broadly. I actually generally agree with the sentiments described in the article. The problem is the article only applied it to news reporters.

 

The statements in the article shouldn't just apply to new reporters. They should apply to politicians as well. They should apply to everyone. The idea is that when you are caught in a lie it should erode people's faith in your character, and in everything else you do. If you lie about one thing, can't you lie about something else?

 

That shouldn't be unique to news reporters, that should be true about humans in general. We could easily use Al Franken as a comparison as well, I just didn't quickly come up with a one liner about him but I'm fine if you'd like to.

 

The more someone lies, the harder it should be to trust them about everything. Trump lies a lot, mostly about little things that are seemingly inconsequential perhaps, but they are still lies. That should, if the viewpoints expressed in this article are valid, erode our trust in him about the things he claims he is telling the truth about.

 

The same thought process could be used for "inflating the truth", which is another common behavior. It isn't outright lying, but it is claiming you are more important, or something is bigger than it really is. A recent example would be the claims about the Asia trip leading to huge billion dollar sales, which no one has been able to confirm. If someone is so comfortable about inflating the truth on one subject (their business acumen), perhaps they are equally comfortable inflating the truth on another subject (how much women "want them" or "let them" do things).

Edited November 21, 2017 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

There is a difference between deflecting, and applying an opinion more broadly. I actually generally agree with the sentiments described in the article. The problem is the article only applied it to news reporters.

 

The statements in the article shouldn't just apply to new reporters. They should apply to politicians as well. They should apply to everyone. The idea is that when you are caught in a lie it should erode people's faith in your character, and in everything else you do. If you lie about one thing, can't you lie about something else?

 

That shouldn't be unique to news reporters, that should be true about humans in general. We could easily use Al Franken as a comparison as well, I just didn't quickly come up with a one liner about him but I'm fine if you'd like to.

 

The more someone lies, the harder it should be to trust them about everything. Trump lies a lot, mostly about little things that are seemingly inconsequential perhaps, but they are still lies. That should, if the viewpoints expressed in this article are valid, erode our trust in him about the things he claims he is telling the truth about.

 

The same thought process could be used for "inflating the truth", which is another common behavior. It isn't outright lying, but it is claiming you are more important, or something is bigger than it really is. A recent example would be the claims about the Asia trip leading to huge billion dollar sales, which no one has been able to confirm. If someone is so comfortable about inflating the truth on one subject (their business acumen), perhaps they are equally comfortable inflating the truth on another subject (how much women "want them" or "let them" do things).

but the article was about news reporters , using that kind of logic if you write a  story about drug use among rock and roll bands you have to talk about drug use among young inner city people.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Nature Boy Flair

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

but the article was about news reporters 

Yep and I'd venture to guess that the writers, and certain people on these forums, wouldn't like expanding the concept beyond the people they want to apply it to because it quickly becomes no longer convenient.

 

I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of the article. They are fine claiming that when a person lies about one thing, it makes them no longer reliable for other issues when it applies to the "fake news media". They seem oblivious to the fact that their "idea" isn't exclusive to the "fake news media".

 

I'd love to see you agree with the article and try to explain why it should only apply to news reporters and not politicians. If a politician lies about his business deals, why trust him when he tells you that he never sexually harassed someone?

Edited November 21, 2017 by bcking

[bcking 3,157]

"If they were fake in the way they presented themselves, the reasoning goes, maybe they were fake in their reporting, too. Maybe lots of reporting is fake."

 

A quote from the original post -

 

I find it an interesting concept, and certainly valid. I just think it is valid for everyone. I don't see why it is conveniently only being discussed for the news reporters.

 

Roy Moore, Al Franken, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, pretty much any politician really. They all lie. Why do we trust them for SOME things, when we know they lie about others? 

Edited November 21, 2017 by bcking

[Dashinka 24,793]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

If Trump has a laundry list of verifiable lies that he has said over the years in public and on twitter...

Then maybe he is lying when he denies the sexual assault allegations and claims his bragging is just "locker room talk"?

 

It's a slippery slope, and can apply to just about anything.

 

If Roy Moore is lying about his penchant for underage girls, then maybe he is lying about his political ideologies etc...

Sure, but we have to attach the same analysis to these venerable journalists that apparently have been living lies.  Quite honestly, I think almost everyone expects politicians to lie, but if a journalist loses their credibility, they might as well pack it in.

[Dashinka 24,793]

16 minutes ago, bcking said:

"If they were fake in the way they presented themselves, the reasoning goes, maybe they were fake in their reporting, too. Maybe lots of reporting is fake."

 

A quote from the original post -

 

I find it an interesting concept, and certainly valid. I just think it is valid for everyone. I don't see why it is conveniently only being discussed for the news reporters.

 

Roy Moore, Al Franken, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, pretty much any politician really. They all lie. Why do we trust them for SOME things, when we know they lie about others? 

Different standards for the credibility of a journalist vs a politician.  Not sure if it is justified, but it is what it is.

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

Sure, but we have to attach the same analysis to these venerable journalists that apparently have been living lies.  Quite honestly, I think almost everyone expects politicians to lie, but if a journalist loses their credibility, they might as well pack it in.

That's a good point. We certainly have different standards for Journalists and Politicians (at least we used to). 

 

Those standards though were eroding far before the sexual harassment cases. Bill O'Reilly seems like ages ago now. And even before any harassment cases, people were already crying foul about journalists. I'm not sure if this adds that much at this point.

 

It does make me still wonder though - If we were supposed to trust Journalists for their honesty, and now we feel we can't anymore because we find out they lie about some things. Why did we (and do we) ever trust Politicians about anything? We can all joke and say "Oh well politicians lie" but then how do we ever decide who to support or how to vote? We must inherently trust them for SOME things but why do we?

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Different standards for the credibility of a journalist vs a politician.  Not sure if it is justified, but it is what it is.

Ya so we are okay with trusting politicians despite knowing they lie because our standards are different?

 

It seems like the true fools are us (the public) then. If you try to step back it doesn't really make sense to excuse an entire group of people just because "they all lie". 

[bcking 3,157]

If we prefer to just focus on Journalists and News Media -

 

Did Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailes erode our trust in Fox News?

 

I mean if Roger Ailes was capable of lying and covering up sexual harassment, I wonder what kind of "fake news" he was capable of covering up and getting Fox News to run? He was CEO after all. The highest level. If he was capable of lies, then perhaps all of fox news is a lie?

[Dashinka 24,793]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

If we prefer to just focus on Journalists and News Media -

 

Did Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailes erode our trust in Fox News?

 

I mean if Roger Ailes was capable of lying and covering up sexual harassment, I wonder what kind of "fake news" he was capable of covering up and getting Fox News to run? He was CEO after all. The highest level. If he was capable of lies, then perhaps all of fox news is a lie?

Agreed, seems like we cannot trust the stuff journalist from any side puts out when these allegations come out.

[TBoneTX 46,122]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

pretty much any politician really. They all lie.

     A busload of Arkansas politicians ran off a country road and rolled over into a ditch by a farmer's field.  The farmer came over, evaluated the situation, then took a shovel and began to bury the politicians.

     The local sheriff soon arrived.  "Were they ALL dead?!" he asked the farmer.

     "Well, some of 'em said they wasn't," said the farmer.  "But you know how them politicians lie."

[Dashinka 24,793]

5 hours ago, bcking said:

Ya so we are okay with trusting politicians despite knowing they lie because our standards are different?

 

It seems like the true fools are us (the public) then. If you try to step back it doesn't really make sense to excuse an entire group of people just because "they all lie". 

Isn’t that what the press bills itself as, sort of a Check and balance of the political class?  Is it ok that politicians lie?  I would say no, but it is hard to find one that doesn’t over promise to pander to a group of electorate.  The press on the other hand is expected to be fair and accurate  (I know, this is questionable today on all sides) and we hope that they bring forth these lies so we can make a more informed decision.  Now with them doing many of the same things as the politicians, it is really a mess.

 

Not sure if you saw my other thread about Rep. John Conyers, but it is eye opening to see how congress has set up their make shift HR department to hide these types of things and use taxpayer money to settle these types of complaints.