Submitted by SellingCoach t3_11y0jev in news
Comments
illy-chan t1_jd6hod2 wrote
Good bit of the way down:
> "On Feb. 1, the Justice Department unveiled criminal charges against Meek related to images of child sex abuse. Among other accusations, authorities say Meek shared a video showing the rape of an infant. Meek has pleaded not guilty and currently sits in federal custody."
lightbulbfragment t1_jd6htnw wrote
JFC. I regret my curiosity.
illy-chan t1_jd6hzc8 wrote
Same honestly. Not a thought I needed as I'm getting ready to sleep.
[deleted] t1_jd6jbj5 wrote
[removed]
Professional-Can1385 t1_jd6iamu wrote
I regret it too.
[deleted] t1_jd6j5zi wrote
[removed]
SsurebreC t1_jd7t2a9 wrote
> Meek shared a video showing the rape of an infant
Just a disgusting reminder that an infant is a child that's between 2 months and 1 year old.
So yeah, some people need to be buried under the jail for this one.
[deleted] t1_jd7vkkz wrote
[deleted]
beatmaster808 t1_jd7vyno wrote
A Newborn
d01100100 t1_jd7w3mf wrote
Newborn is for the first month. I'm not sure what the term is for after that other than infant.
throwingutah t1_jd8jb9t wrote
Neonate. I learned it was one month, though.
Formergr t1_jd8xqb5 wrote
I had to stop myself from downvoting you out of pure reflexive disgust, ugh ugh ugh. Awful.
nailback t1_jda3j0v wrote
Well d@mn.
420trashcan t1_jd7ax4p wrote
Fun fact, it's lede. It's a typesetters term, and it's spelled weird so they know not to actually print that word.
GetOffMyLawn1729 t1_jd7r0e2 wrote
actually it's spelled that way so as not to confuse it with "lead", as in the metal. In the days of lead type, extra space between lines would be added by inserting thin strips of lead. So you could say "Put 4 extra points of lead after the lede".
peppermedicomd t1_jd86lu1 wrote
Actually lede is a made-up word used to trick students.
[deleted] t1_jdgw04q wrote
[removed]
serial_dabbler t1_jdaasy6 wrote
Fun fact: it can be either lead or lede.
InkIcan t1_jd7z3z6 wrote
That's what I get for using speech to text.
serial_dabbler t1_jdabnpz wrote
No. Your version isn't wrong either. It can be spelled either way.
d01100100 t1_jd7xo49 wrote
I believe the reason was that this article is focused upon the relationship of the lead editor at RS with the subject of the original story by Tatiana Siegel in October 2022.
There was a later RS article written by Adam Rawnsley on Feb 2023 that goes further in depth on the charges. It's an article not for the squeamish.
If you're curious you can dig up the Reddit conversations off the original aforementioned article. They chalk it up to the FBI trying to stifle dissent, something both conspiracy and socialists agreed upon.
I also believe this NPR article is trying to show how the editorial curtailing of the original story lead to how this story could be spun to such an extent that when the later article was issued, there just wasn't a big shitstorm surrounding it.
JustAKeyboard t1_jd948xc wrote
We wont tell you why either.. but they didn't also.
VioletBloom2020 t1_jda559r wrote
OMG same! I was reading and reading, waiting for it- and what I was reading didn’t make any sense.
[deleted] t1_jd81z4j wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd9c0lq wrote
[removed]
ArugulaZ t1_jd6tu6q wrote
When RS first reported it, they were like "Our first amendment rights are under severe threat!" Uh, no, they weren't arresting the guy to silence him. He broke the law, in a most egregious way, and trying to spin it like this makes you look like conspirators.
zjm555 t1_jd8c7e6 wrote
Exactly what I was thinking -- the guy at RS trying to cover all this up seems real suspicious.
nau5 t1_jd9248e wrote
The Rolling Stone hasn't had quality reporting in decades. The NY Post might have higher standards when it comes to verifying their reporting.
0pimo t1_jd7q2fb wrote
Not saying the guy isn't a pedo, but the Feds planting CP on his devices would be right up their alley.
HydroCorndog t1_jd8s2rg wrote
I've seen it before. It is a possibility. I know nothing about this case though.
Whatwouldntwaldodo t1_jd72kes wrote
Did he?
He’s plead not guilty. If you think the FBI is above unethical tactics against their opposition, you’re being naive.
delcodick t1_jd78jxw wrote
An initial plea of not guilty is the norm within the justice system 🙄
[deleted] t1_jd7z1jf wrote
[removed]
BOSS-3000 t1_jd8oxh7 wrote
Aren't speeding tickets the most frequent charges? Wouldn't pleading guilty or no contest then be the "norm"?
delcodick t1_jd8p16m wrote
A traffic infraction is not a crime. Do try and keep up
BOSS-3000 t1_jd8w69d wrote
How does one "keep up" without asking questions?
mynameisalso t1_jd9o693 wrote
By reading previous comments.
BOSS-3000 t1_jda2zwz wrote
If you had read the previous comments, you should have noticed none of the previous comments mention speeding tickets.
HydroCorndog t1_jd8t24u wrote
If you have been charged with it, it's all over. The act is so reprehensible that a false accusation is as good as the truth. Public opinion will never shift back even when the accuser admits to lying. The man is doomed. Is it acceptable? I don't know. Maybe the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Like the death penalty, I think there should be ironclad proof.
[deleted] t1_jd7r3tj wrote
[deleted]
KamaKairade t1_jd7k5xz wrote
While you were downvoted by blue-line-zealots, you raise one of two points:
1: For the FBI to employ the tactic of using CP as a guise to obtain information and circumvent the 4th is not unheard of.
2: The only way to know the result for sure is to wait for the trial, which there often isn't one, because the matter is usually pleaded to avoid embarrassment.
Sebekiz t1_jd7lyc4 wrote
This is why so many people are convinced that the "main stream media" is lying to them and turn to conspiracy theories and fringe "news" sources for their information. While Rolling Stone isn't exactly a publication I would look to for journalism, unless it involves the world of music and entertainment, the fact that they would post a news article that is so misleading just serves to convince many people that journalists really are lying to them.
This editor needs to be fired and banned from any job related to journalism.
StatusQuotidian t1_jd7yxjd wrote
>This is why so many people are convinced that the "main stream media" is lying to them
Nah, so many people are convinced the "mainstream media" is lying to them because of multiple lavishly funded multi-decade propaganda campaigns.
Sebekiz t1_jdabnob wrote
I probably should have phrased it as "part of the reason why", but things like this certainly help the propaganda campaigns since it serves to prove their point.
sticky-bit t1_jda5z2k wrote
> fact that they would post a news article that is so misleading just serves to convince many people that journalists really are lying to them.
How about that time that ABC news created a completely fictional Kurdish holocaust by doctoring a video of a machine gun shoot that happens twice a year near Knob Creek, Kentucky?
Did you know they had the journalistic integrity to retract the story after being caught red-handed, but only with a notice on Twitter? Then they scrubbed every URL about the story off their website and pointed the URLs to a generic 404 page.
Sebekiz t1_jdacevi wrote
I don't recall hearing about that story, but sadly I am not surprised. Most journalists and editors do their best to provide good stories, but it just takes is a one person willing to bend the truth either because they were paid off, or to fit a personal agenda or because they know someone (in this case the editor knew the accused) and all that integrity is wasted. When the truth comes out eventually it just reinforces all of the propaganda and conspiracy theories that lead so many people to believe that most/all of the profession is lying.
sticky-bit t1_jdanrbn wrote
Getting bamboozled from your source is one thing.
Having multiple people working as a team to scrub the mistake off the website in such a MINTRUTH way is something else entirely.
If ABC wanted to retract the story, they should ethically retract the story, not try to scrub it's existence off the internet. Also, they should have seriously consider burning their source so that same source doesn't bamboozle some other media outlet, (if in fact they are blaming their source and did not doctor the video in-house.)
Someone, maybe ABC news, maybe their source that they're still protecting altered the video to darken all the spectators in the foreground filming a barrel of gasoline being hit with tracer rounds downrange.
> Most journalists and editors do their best to provide good stories, but it just takes is a one person willing to bend the truth either because they were paid off, or to fit a personal agenda or because they know someone
yearz t1_jdbgsb6 wrote
In recent years, major "trusted" media outlets have been pushing pet narratives in the guise of factual reporting; a fraction of Americans possess the critical thinking ability to recognize that
4dxn t1_jdpfrb6 wrote
Wait rolling stones is mainstream news? Do people not read wsj, hill, slate, nyt anymore?
KazeNilrem t1_jd6l50u wrote
This is the sort of thing that I feel destroys credibility. If you looked to for news and become clear that there is seemingly a conscious and wilful decision to omit information and misleading readers, that's wrong. At that point ought to be fired or removed because cannot be trusted.
Especially with how fucked up the supposed shared video is, zero sympathy. It is no wonder the article had a warning at the top.
[deleted] t1_jd8teij wrote
[removed]
fsr1967 t1_jd7b5vn wrote
Damn. Rolling Stone used to have good reporting. Not I'm not sure I can trust them.
sigh
Another well-liked/trusted icon bites the dust.
RNBQ4103 t1_jd7gjx6 wrote
That article about campus rapes (for which the accusations turned completely bogus) also badly damaged it.
bulletbassman t1_jd80s0g wrote
Talibbi has moved on from rs but he’s still a low iq sensationalist pos.
DenotheFlintstone t1_jd87rj5 wrote
Didn't he just testify in the last couple weeks in front of congress?
bulletbassman t1_jd8ktqb wrote
Yeah basically trying to convince congress that the government is infringing free speech because they are trying to remove misinformation from social media platforms. Absolutely ripe from a guy who’s consistently proved thru out his career not to verify his sources.
HydroCorndog t1_jd8tkn4 wrote
I used to believe in him.
BoldestKobold t1_jd95gzs wrote
Yeah, because he was Musk's hand-picked "twitter files" guy who was tweeting about the Dem-led federal government or Dem politicians asking Twitter to take down misinformation, while actively avoiding talking about the pre-2020 Trump administration or Republican politicians making similar requests.
Guy was previously just a run of the mill sensationalist and sometimes acceptable journalist. Now he is totally fine using his name to lend credibility to clearly and obviously partisan actions.
Minimum_Intention848 t1_jd9n6qp wrote
As a believer in both Russia gate and Putins web of corruption I think Matt Taibbi's wikipedia page puts some of his positions in perspective.
[deleted] t1_jd87nsr wrote
[removed]
sticky-bit t1_jda58db wrote
> Rolling Stone used to have good reporting.
Are we talking about the "Gunshot Victims Left Waiting as Horse Dewormer Overdoses Overwhelm Oklahoma Hospitals, Doctor Says" story they never retracted, or further back with the retracted "A Rape on Campus" story where they finally did?
diefreetimedie t1_jd6mkbv wrote
Corporate media is a scourge upon our society in today's day and age. Like SOAD said all them years ago...
"Advertising's got you on the run..."
justec1 t1_jd7m4yv wrote
Mmmmm. Pizza Pizza pie.
billpalto t1_jd84ehm wrote
Raped an infant??
I'd vote for the death penalty.
amancanandican t1_jd6lziy wrote
They are basically protecting pure evil
[deleted] t1_jd77b7e wrote
[removed]
Whatwouldntwaldodo t1_jd72oii wrote
He’s plead “not guilty”.
It’s entirely possibly this guy is innocent. The FBI have done some nasty things to their perceived enemies.
delcodick t1_jd78mgg wrote
It is 98% probable that he will change his plea to guilty 🙄
HydroCorndog t1_jd8ty6t wrote
All you need to do is accuse a guy of cp. The public will do the rest. It's remarkable, isn't it?
[deleted] t1_jd9iz1j wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd6jv5l wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd6p0iz wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd6ys0k wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd73s0m wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd7onhi wrote
[removed]
goinmobile2030 t1_jd7oz4w wrote
In the interest of publication, details need to be released. So too, does Shachtman.
too_old_to_be_clever t1_jd7q8m7 wrote
Rolling Stone, why? You report things, so report them. It's not that hard.
[deleted] t1_jd86yjr wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd890yb wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd897ag wrote
[removed]
SolidDistribution542 t1_jd8rys0 wrote
"classified information" used in place of child porn is quite haunting, we’ve been using this term a lot lately.
[deleted] t1_jdajuo7 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jd9yoet wrote
[removed]
Minimum_Intention848 t1_jd9iyua wrote
I *think* "the implication" of the article is that the material may have been planted because an intelligence service didn't like the content of his reporting.
Yes, it's conspiratorial and the author seems to be avoiding coming out and saying it by presenting the editorial timeline instead of verbalizing the theory.
robbycakes t1_jd7pita wrote
Did the NPR article say why?
Colonel_Angus_ t1_jd845g9 wrote
Kiddie porn
[deleted] t1_jd7ypv1 wrote
[removed]
InkIcan t1_jd6h395 wrote
I got 2/3 of the way through this article and I still don't know why. Way to bury the lead.