Joy Reid Says She Was Hacked (But She Wasn't)

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

In the case of the Crist stuff, she apologized for the insensitivity, but her “line” was that Crist was a Republican so she was only attacking Republican hypocrisy on gay issues, albeit in an insensitive manner.

Cite

[Bricker]

@Fair_Rarity

I don’t know if she really wrote the things that have come to light recently. There have been some people who say that the screen grabs look like they might have been manipulated. So maybe hacked isn’t the right word but framed is closer if that is the case? One analysis I read suggested the wording was not like the rest of her stuff and the timestamps were at times when she was on the air and couldn’t be posting, for example.

No – as the linked article discusses:

[Reid’s attorney] claimed that the timestamps on “many of the posts” on Reid’s blog are too close together to be the work of a single blogger. The letters provide as the only example Reid’s 2006 live-blogging of Samuel Alito’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing, noting that Reid pushed short updates to the post at 10:18 a.m., 11:34 a.m., and 11:41 a.m.

“The Blog, however, also shows a lengthy, fraudulent entry, ‘Things people say when they’re on the Fox News Channel,’ supposedly posted right in the midst of this, at 11:28 a.m.,” wrote Reichmann. “Ms. Reid did not have the superhuman blogging skills needed to do all of these posts simultaneously.”

But the “lengthy, fraudulent entry” about Fox News Reichmann is referring to consisted of just two lines of original text, plus a copy-pasted quote. A check of CSPAN’s archive also shows that the post was made shortly after a 15-minute break in the hearing.

Now, I don’t know if that information is correct. And I haven’t read that anyone else used Way Back or whatever to verify these posts other than the original person who dug them up.

Then you didn’t read the article linked in the OP. Here is another quote from that article:

The Internet Archive’s records show the disputed posts were mirrored by the Wayback Machine no later than 2009, and many of them were archived much earlier, some within hours of appearing on Reid’s blog.

(emphasis added)

Again, I have no trouble believing that she genuinely no longer believes those things. But I have great difficulty believing she never wrote them, and only slightly less difficulty believing that she doesn’t remember them.

[Bryan_Ekers]

For Gilbert and Sullivan fans.

[Johanna]

Perhaps the hacker was the disavowed, unacknowledged shadow side of her own personality. It can seem like something alien to one’s conscious self-image when the whole self isn’t integrated. Then it would be literally an “inside job.”

[iiandyiiii]

Assuming she actually wrote that stuff, it was really, really dumb of her not to just say something like “I used to have bigoted beliefs about gay people, and those views have changed, and I’m truly sorry for the homophobic and bigoted things I said and wrote in the past”, which would have been (based on my reading of various prominent LGBT bloggers) very easily accepted by gay activists in general, and the story would have gone away. I suppose there’s a slim chance she was actually hacked, but so far from what I’ve read that seems pretty damn unlikely.