Newly Published Clinton Email Reveals How Government Manipulates Media

October 1, 2015   |   Carey Wedler

Carey Wedler
October 1, 2015

(ANTIMEDIAWashington D.C. — A Hillary Clinton staffer planted questions in a CBS 60 Minutes interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, according to email records released this week. At the time of the interview in early 2011, Assange had already leaked sensitive, embarrassing information from the State Department. The unclassified staff email to Clinton, released amid her ongoing email scandal, demonstrates not only that the former Secretary of State and her staff were out to discredit Assange, but that the government manipulates media and wields heavy influence over it.

In an email from January 28, 2011, Philip J. Crowley, then Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, alerted Hillary Clinton that 60 Minutes conducted an interview with Assange set to air on the 30th. As Crowley informed her, “We had made a number of suggestions for outside experts and former diplomats to interview to ‘balance’ the piece.” This statement alone shows the access to media that powerful government agents enjoy.

He goes on to further reveal that influence: “60 Minutes assures me that they raised a number of questions and concerns we planted with them during the course of the interview,” Crowley said, suggesting the interview would not be embarrassing to Clinton or the State Department: “We will be prepared to respond to the narrative Assange presents during the program.”

The 2011 interview features a younger looking Assange with interviewer Steve Kroft.

Several minutes into the conversation, Kroft asks Assange point-blank if he is a “subversive.” Interestingly, the only politician Assange names directly in his response is Clinton herself: “I’m sure there are certain views among Hillary Clinton and her lot that we are subverting their authority. But you’re right, we are subverting illegitimate authority. The question is whether the authority is legitimate or whether it is illegitimate.

Kroft pushed Assange regarding accusations that sensitive information about government operators was leaked to terrorists: “There have been reports of people quoting Taliban leaders saying they had the names of these people and they were going to take retribution,” he commented. Assange retaliated that the Taliban is not a coherent group, though he did not deny the dangers of releasing information.

Other notable, potentially planted statements and questions?

There’s a perception on the part of some people who believe that your agenda right now is anti-American,” Kroft said to Assange, who dismissed that notion by highlighting the fact that Americans send Wikileaks information and it is in the “revolutionary” spirit to do so.

Kroft pushed, “Someone in the Australian government said that, ‘Look, if you play outside the rules you can’t expect to be protected by the rules.’ And you played outside the rules. You’ve played outside the United States’ rules.” Assange reminded him that he had not sought out classified information and rather, it was provided to him. He explained:

“There is the First Amendment. It covers the case. And there’s been no precedent that I’m aware of in the past 50 years of prosecuting a publisher for espionage. It is just not done. Those are the rules. You do not do it.” Assange dismissed ideas that he should be prosecuted.

When accusing Assange of espionage didn’t work, Kroft tried another angle. He suggested that if Julian Assange was not punished, it would set a dangerous precedent for others to leak classified documents. Kroft said:

“…if they don’t come after you now that what they have done is essentially endorsed small, powerful organization with access to very powerful information releasing it outside their control. And if they let you get away it, then they are encouraging —”

Assange interrupted: “Then what? They will have to have freedom of the press?” After a brief and tense exchange, Assange asserted, “If we’re talking about creating threats to small publishers to stop them publishing, the U.S. has lost its way. It has abrogated its founding traditions. It has thrown the First Amendment in the bin. Because publishers must be free to publish.”

Ironically, throughout their conversation about free speech and the freedom of the press, Kroft was feeding him questions straight from the mouth of government — more specifically, a government agency with a probable vendetta against Assange for releasing embarrassing information.

The government is no stranger to manipulating the media. It was recently revealed that the CIA heavily influenced the bin-Laden-themed film, Zero Dark Thirty. The military regularly reviews films with military-subject matter and helps dictate content. The New York Times presented information in a way that deceptively downplayed the CIA’s operations in Syria, a move many view as a consequence of the agency’s decades-old efforts to manipulate the media.

News of the State Department’s manipulation of Assange’s interview is not a revelation. Nevertheless, it constitutes yet another crack in the facade of carefully crafted sound bites and the subtle, yet potent, manipulation of information.

As Edward Snowden, who recently joined Twitter, posted,


This article (Newly Published Clinton Email Reveals How Government Manipulates Media) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

Author: Carey Wedler

Carey Wedler joined Anti-Media as an independent journalist in September of 2014. Her topics of interest include the police and warfare states, the Drug War, the relevance of history to current problems and solutions, and positive developments that drive humanity forward. She currently resides in Los Angeles, California, where she was born and raised.

Share This Post On

15 Comments

  1. Really, do you think America has EVER been an actual democracy? The revolution itself was the product of an elite, not of the ”people”. Just take a look at the founding fathers. The French revolution was triggered by the people, the American revolution was engineered by the upper class.

    Post a Reply
  2. 've­­­­­ made ­­­­­$84,000­­­­­ so­­­­­ far­­­­­ this­­­­­ year­­­­­ working­­­­­ online­­­­­ and­­­­­ I'm­­­­­ a full­­­­­ ­­­­­time ­­­­­student. ­­­­­I'm ­­­­­using ­­­­­an online ­­­­­business ­­­­­opportunity ­­­­­I ­­­­­heard ­­­­­about ­­­­­and I've­­­­­ made­­­­­ such­­­­­ great­­­­­ money­­­­­. It's­­­­­ really­­­­­ ­­­­­user friendly­­­­­ and­­­­­ I'm­­­­­ just­­­­­ so ­­­­­happy ­­­­­that ­­­­­I ­­­­­found ­­­­­out ­­­­­about ­­­­­it. ­­­­­Heres ­­­­­what ­­­­­I've ­­­­­been doing­­­­­,

    ­w­­w­­w­­.­­f­­o­­x­­-­­r­­e­­v­­i­­e­­w­­s­­7­­.­­c­­o­­­­mONLY

    Please remove the ONLY

    @)**_&^=

    Post a Reply
  3. ✧✧✧✧After being fired from my old job 6 months ago, i've had luck to learn about this great company online that was a lifesaver for me… They offer online home-based work. My last month payment after working with them for 3 months was 12000 bucks… Great thing about it was that only requirement for the job is basic typing and reliable internet…If you think this could be for you then find out more here
    w­­w­­w.worknet4.c­­o­­mCOPY THE LINK

    Post a Reply
  4. ✧✧✧✧After being fired from my old job 6 months ago, i've had luck to learn about this great company online that was a lifesaver for me… They offer online home-based work. My last month payment after working with them for 3 months was 12000 bucks… Great thing about it was that only requirement for the job is basic typing and reliable internet…If you think this could be for you then find out more here
    w­­w­­w.worknet4.c­­o­­mCOPY THE LINK

    Post a Reply
  5. I feel it's been one big hoax since day one! We been duped by the big banking clans of England and by our own Government who in terms are supposed to be working for the people. But that's just my thought I did just wake up I could be wrong.

    Post a Reply
  6. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $35h – $80h…how? I'm working online
    w­w­w.w­o­r­k­t­o­d­a­y­3­3.c­o­m

    Post a Reply
  7. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $35h – $80h…how? I'm working online
    w­w­w.w­o­r­k­t­o­d­a­y­3­3.c­o­m

    Post a Reply
  8. my roomate's step-aunt makes $73 /hour on the laptop . She has been fired from work for eight months but last month her check was $12321 just working on the laptop for a few hours.

    try this out ——> ­­­­­­­­w­­­­­­­w­­­­­­­w­­­­­­­.­­­­­­­n­­­­­­­e­­­­­­­t­­­­­­­c­­­­­­­a­­­­­­­s­­­­­­­h­­­­­­­2­­­­­­­1­­­­­­­.­­­­­­­c­­­­­­­o­­­­­­­m­­­­­­­

    Post a Reply
  9. So what is your comment supposed to mean? We should not care? We should not call on our leaders to stop trying to mask reality with their patriotic rhetoric of the greatest democracy in the world? I don't really understand your comment other than to think you support Hillary and this hurts your brain to think that she has been such a prominent player in this evil system.

    Post a Reply
  10. So…move to France! You sound PERFECTLY suited to become part of the tsunami! Au revoir!

    Post a Reply
  11. So you can't even trust 60 minutes. What a corrupted bought and paid for world we live in.

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *