Because they keep publishing fake news, hiding inconvenient truths, and lying. They report any and all unverified anti-Trump rumors, no matter how ridiculous, but refuse to report fairly when legitimate accusations are made against others. I used to like CNN, but over the past 2 years they have embarrassed themselves terribly, and their ratings show it.
Can you give some examples of things they have published which are fake, or lies that have been exposed? Most of the cases where people have claimed this, it's been due to a critical failure to read the reporting CNN actually did.
For instance, in the recent case where Buzzfeed released a massively unsubstantiated intelligence "dossier," CNN reported that Buzzfeed had done it and that it had been given to Trump and Obama in a briefing. Those two pieces of information are important and valid to report. CNN never said the document was accurate and didn't itself publish it specifically because it's not verifiable. How is that "fake news?"
CNN said “it’s illegal to possess these stolen documents [the Hilary emails from wikileaks]. It’s different for the media. So everything you learn about this, you’re learning from us.”
Thats fake and a lie, and they were exposed quickly about that.
Agreed. It's a lie, and a particularly boneheaded one.
Is that occurrence enough to conclude that all their reporting, on everything, is flawed? Because if so I think I could find similar examples from effectively any mainstream source, and any partisan (HuffPo, Breitbart, et.c) ones as well.
Who exactly should we trust when our criteria exclude everyone?
That is an opinion piece at one of the Washington Post's blogs, the Volokh Conspiracy, it is not a news article. Furthermore, the blog authors are not Post employees and they are editorially independent from the rest of the newspaper.
That being said, I strongly believe that reputable news sources should not publish unmoderated opinion blogs from their own domain. No matter how many times the page says "opinion" or "blog" or "unaffiliated", if it's published on their site, on their platform, on their domain, it's going to be equated with that news outlet.
February. False story about Carson dropping out. Their own "fact checker" lied about it.
August. CNN edits footage of sister of man shot by Milwaukee police to make it sound like she was calling for peace. She was calling for riots in white cities.
I don't think you know what fake news is. It isn't biased news, its not incorrect news, or unsubstantiated rumors.
It is websites that steal CSS and styles from official news sites. That then create a fake news paper and publish 100% fiction. The Denver Guardian http://www.snopes.com/fbi-agent-murder-suicide/ is an example of "Fake News". Nothing published by CNN or FiveThirtyEight is fake news. Incorrect, sure, possibly biased but not "Fake News".
You don't get to redefine fake news. I'm a huge fan of real journalism, and the ethics and integrity behind it. When journalists fail those ethics and report things they haven't vetted, that is not news, it's fake news.
What about 538's data is suspect, given that it merely aggregates the data put out by a wide variety of other organizations (of all political bents)?