Revising CNN blackmail and its causes

This is the first part of a blog series concerning CNN blackmail and the future of corporate social responsibility. I would highly appreciate your contribution to this discussion.

When I first time heard about #CNNblackmail by Twitter users, I seriously could not tell if it was fake news or not. Then I finally found CNN politics telling:

"Reddit user "HanA**holeSolo" first shared the GIF last Wednesday of Trump pummeling a wrestler with CNN's logo imposed on his face. CNN could find no earlier instance of the GIF. The GIF was later edited into a video with sound and tweeted by the President on Sunday."

"CNN is not publishing "HanA**holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same. CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change."

So, CNN was blackmailing a random person on the internet who made a triggering meme. It was real. Once again I had to tell myself: it is the current year. Just as I could expect, internet reacted by producing an enormous amount of similar memes about CNN. That is where the media giant had already lost by entering a battle it could only lose. Getting a part of the "establishment" triggered to do something like that is probably the biggest achievement for a practically harmless internet troll.

It is still difficult to imagine that as late as 2017 CNN would go abusing its power and risking its reputation for such a small target, despite the long history of bad PR cases, Streisand effect and the anonymous internet sub cultures. It was no surprise that the acts of CNN were judged critically by wide audience. These days being a mainstream organization and having no peer support is a serious sign of crossing a line even beyond THE line.

If we should not take the easy path and assume responsible people at CNN to be totally incompetent, we could try to rationalize and understand what led to this. What are the factors that made those people even consider a blackmail operation to be an option? We need to look around and go back a few steps.

It is a fact that there has been a strong anti-Trump hegemony throughout the US continent and the international audience also. During the year we have had news about street activism, marches, student riots and even brutal acts of violence against Trump supporters and the like. In fact, it is not just about one person, but also a cultural clash. You do not need to be an actual Trump supporter to find yourself on the same side when it comes to free speech, safe spaces, hatespeech surveillance, privilege talk and other topics that the recent years have brought us.

When the radicals have already gone far, it is eventually quite mainstream to just visibly oppose Trump. When everybody within your bubble and around you appear to send signals for the very same values, you do not question the purpose anymore. Your surroundings form the league you are competing, and the strength of your signal is all that matters. The purpose justifies the ends, as if outsiders would not matter anymore. And when you really want to stand out as an opportunistic media person, bets need to be raised in a creative way. In the case of CNN, somebody was too over-confident...

...or maybe ahead of one's time? In the next post I will discuss, if this CNN blackmail could be the early face of extended political corporate social responsibility. Stay tuned and please, feel free to add your thoughts!