I don't care if the blog was hacked, I don't care if it wasn't, I don't care if the screen shots were changed. I care about the views that Joy Reid reflects today and that is it.

As opposed to claiming her blog was hacked and she didn't really write these things.

with the less than three days before the internet archive took the "picture" of the site? Just so that 10 years later, when she actually became a national figure on MSNBC, it could be used against her when an unpopular Republican was president. Seriously? That seems about the same level of conspiracy theory as someone publishing that Obama was born in Hawaii right after he was born so that they would have proof he wasn't born in Kenya so he cold be president.

Occam's Razor, my friend.

If it happened 10 years ago she has been showing that she had risen above. Why do we, Liberal/Progressives always eat our own. We deserve tRump and company if that continues. There is no purity in anyone.

Getting to effective.
Rachel must be next........

Because none of those people recall these specific unusual, offensive & out of character posts.

They might have not seemed particularly offensive at the time either.

Please do remember that she has apologized for some homophobic content on her blog.

I guess the people that knew her at the time weren't troubled by those?

Because if they weren't ALL OF THE PEOPLE I MENTIONED - including LBGT people, people who knew her at the time the posts were supposedly created, and members of DU - WOULD HAVE REMEMBERED THEM!

Get your head out of your ass.

Just weren't bothered by them?

Last edited Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Everybody evolves on things. If she owns up to the past posts, and says she no longer believes those things, then that would be good enough for me.

give a damn either way.

There's

this lynching of Joy Reid as I seeing by other dems ensures they stay home...

allow this to happen.

..you haven't really learned squat that would back up your claim that 'Joy Reids Hacking Claims Look Increasingly Unlikely'

You're just piling on.

This is not boding well...and with Dems piling on...it validates what others here have posted ..Rethugs retain both House and Senate
Dems have no long game plan

...which is still as pragmatic about their vote as ever.

I don't believe there will be any significant split with the party over this. I do think some will view these attacks on this prominent black journalist as arbitrary and capricious, and will react by tuning out these discordant sources of criticism.

It's the title of the article at Huffington Post.

...with disputable arguments which have already been made (and addressed) in several forums.

I love Joy.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

April 25, 2018 by Shelley Powers
The Joy Reid Saga: The Wayback Machine cannot guarantee authenticity


____ The Wayback Machine is an invaluable historical record of the web. Through it, I’ve been able to recover past writings lost because of all the many changes I’ve made to my web site. It’s a wonderful way of exploring the web’s history.

However, the Wayback Machine is not, and never has been, a definitive source of the authenticity of what it captures on the web. It has access to a web page at a specific location at a specific time…but no special privilege that allows it to determine the authenticity of the author of the content in the page.

As noted by Chris Butler at the Internet Archives, home organization for the Wayback Machine:

When we reviewed the archives, we found nothing to indicate tampering or hacking of the Wayback Machine versions. At least some of the examples of allegedly fraudulent posts provided to us had been archived at different dates and by different entities.

Pages archived at different dates and by different entities... This statement is key to understanding the difference between Wayback Machine’s archival functionality as separate from the media’s assumption of Wayback Machine as Super Authenticator, able to leap tall metadata with a single bound!

(Do play a musical flourish in your mind when you read that last sentence.)

To demonstrate this key difference between archival tool and authenticator, take a look at one of my web pages found at the Archive. The page is dated September 1, 2015, but was first archived by the Wayback Machine on October 12, 2015. Click the right arrow located in the Wayback Machine’s header at the top page. You’ll see that the article text remains the same through several snapshots. However, if you click the arrow long enough, you’ll get to the March 20, 2016 snapshot, where you can see that the page’s text is now different.

I made the change to the text, and also added the date when I made the change. Honest, cross my heart and hope to die: I made the change.

However, it would have been a simple thing for someone to hack into my weblog account and modify this page at a later time, which would then be captured at some future time on the Wayback Machine…and I would have no idea that the page had been modified, and you would have had no idea whether I was the author of the changed content, or someone else. All we know for a fact is that the Wayback Machine made a snapshot of the page that looked one way at one time, and different at another time.

The assumption of authenticity is the error made by the original Twitter ‘sleuth’. This is the error made by Mediaite. This is the same error made by most of media reporting on this story: that appearance of the content in a snapshot at the Wayback Machine is what was actually originally posted by a specific person. That the Wayback Machine’s content is authentic.

That Reid apologized for some homophobic comments is an authentic statement because she hasn’t denied making this statement. And if you look at one of the screenshots one can see the type of statement that Reid possibly could have made leading to this apologize. For instance, one of the pages shows Reid defending President Obama when he was attacked by the gay community before he embraced gay marriage. I wouldn’t be surprised by this, and could easily see Reid writing what she did at the time.

However, an odd addendum at the end of the page contains a link to a HuffPo piece that goes farther in defense of those against gay marriage. This link and the text that followed could have been written by Reid, or could have easily been inserted at a later time and we would have no way of knowing if Reid added the text or someone else. We have no way of knowing whether she wrote any of the weblog post other than we might not be surprised that Reid would defend our nation’s first black President against gays unhappy with his views at the time.

So yes, Reid could be apologizing for past content, while at the same time denouncing as fake some or all of the content discovered by Twitter sleuth. There is no contradiction other than that in the minds of pundits seeking to find such, or journalists told to quickly put out a 1000 words on the topic...

read more: https://burningbird.net/the-joy-reid-saga-the-wayback-machine-cannot-guarantee-authenticity/#.WuCS9WkjH4U.twitter

Nauseating.

the screen shots took place in 2006.

I think it's naive to think that hacking is something new. It could have very well happened. A black woman with a strong voice is not welcomed in today's world by conservatives. It would have been even more nerve-grating for them to see in 2006.

And left up the posts on her blog?

There's a lot of variables. Was she monitoring her own blog, or did she have a website master.

I put up a website and practically abandoned it. It happens.

This is a wait and see, situation. And I don't think it's a good idea to go negative without having all the facts in.

You don't have to rely on screen shots from others.

And she has admitted to and apologized for other homophobic content already.

Joy will gather new strength from these attacks.

Then everyone can move on.

When confronted with the nonsense about "altered screenshots," the expert replied

Trolls declared him guilty just like today they are claiming Joy Reid is guilty.

And did it over and over.

Several other posters have shared similar sentiments.

Stand by... never mind.

Travesty.2 Trolls are out in force.