NSA's Personal Propagandist For CBS Officially Takes Counterterrorism Job Everyone Knew He Was Getting
from the journalism! dept
When 60 Minutes did its hack PR job for the NSA a few weeks ago, lots of people called out the fact that the reporter who handled the segment, John Miller, wasn’t just a former intelligence official working for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (which oversees the NSA), but that he was widely rumored to have worked out a deal for a new job for the NYPD, heading up “counterterrorism.” Even though there were multiple reports at the time, including one that claimed it was a “99.44% done deal,” when asked about it, Miller lied. He told a reporter, “you know as much about this as I do.”
That was clearly Miller lying — something that Miller has had an issue with in the past — as the “rumor” is now confirmed and Miller has accepted his job doing “counterterrorism” for the NYPD. And while some might say that doing counterterrorism for a city police force is different than working for national intelligence, that’s only because you’re not familiar with the NYPD, which has set up something of a shadow NSA/CIA to do all sorts of activities not normally associated with a police force.
And, of course, since the press was clearly familiar with Miller’s expected role, it raises serious questions about why 60 Minutes allowed the puff piece to move forward with a seriously conflicted “journalist.” While Miller has lashed out at critics, rather than respond to a single point raised, the brand that comes out worst in all this is clearly CBS and 60 Minutes — which basically let an intelligence official do an entire propaganda piece on the NSA. 60 Minutes used to be about hard hitting journalism. Now, apparently, they think it’s “journalism” to shill for the surveillance state.
Filed Under: 60 minutes, cbs news, conflict of interest, john miller, journalism, nsa, nypd, propaganda
Comments on “NSA's Personal Propagandist For CBS Officially Takes Counterterrorism Job Everyone Knew He Was Getting”
Well, to be fair, it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that an incriminating envelope landed on the 60 Minutes editor’s desk, with a small note explaining what their agenda is going to be.
'Honest' via technicality
Even though there were multiple reports at the time, including one that claimed it was a “99.44% done deal,” when asked about it, Miller lied. He told a reporter, “you know as much about this as I do.”
That could technically be considered honest actually, if you assume that both the one asking the question, and the one answering it, already know full well what the outcome would be.
So if he knew full well that he’d get the job, and the reporter that asked the question knew full well that he’d get the job, then that statement would be accurate. Sleazy dodge sure, but it would be an ‘honest’ answer.
Re: 'Honest' via technicality
I think the point is that while he may not have known for sure, at the time, if he was going to be accepted for the job he was likely, at the time, attempting to get the job and that creates a conflict of interest.
And we take more steps towards becoming what we claimed we were better than.
Our rights are violated in the name of “safety”, and we foot the bill for useless programs that do nothing to make us more safe.
Our media is now just a lapdog, parroting the party line and not raising any real issues about the abuses that should not exist in a free society.
Everything we were taught was wrong with other countries, we have become that and worse.
And more people want to focus on issues much less important than citizen rights being destroyed.
I scratch your back, you scratch mine. That the mainstream media has become a megaphone for government propaganda is no revelation to anyone who’s been paying attention.
c’mon man, you know better: miller was chosen BECAUSE he was a compromised shill, not in spite of it…
Does this really surprise anyone after the Cnet/CES/Dish Hopper Best in Show debacle? Remember, CNET is a CBS property. Obviously, CBS no longer has journalistic integrity and is no longer a trustworthy news source.
How times have changed
“60 Minutes” used the be the punch line of a joke –
“You know you are going to have a bad day when you get to the office and Mike Wallace is waiting for you”
Now, “60 minutes” IS the joke.
Seems to me that CBS are just puppets. They suspended Logan for her false report about Benghzai (probably at the behest of the government) yet they allow this NSA shill to sprout all his crap (again probably at the behest of the government).
“That was clearly Miller lying”
It was the least untruthful answer.
This will not end well.
They lost me
I usually check out what is on 60 Minutes. Yesterday I didn’t bother, I have no respect for their reporting any longer.
“60 Minutes used to be about hard hitting journalism.”
No, not true. Take, for example
“That was clearly Miller lying…”
Crony journalism begets liars. I work for a company that’s eaten up with cronyism and see it all the time.
John Miller was never a “former” intelligence official. He was assigned to PR for awhile.