Local anchors had to read a sneakily pro-Trump script on-air. This is scary.

Theres a curious video going around featuring several local news anchors reading from an identical script. “We’re concerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible, one-sided news stories plaguing our country,” the reporters say in their recorded segments. “The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media.”

Watch the video yourself (story continues below):

So, what exactly did you just watch?

Telecommunications giant Sinclair Broadcast Group recently required local stations to produce and air a segment slamming the “fake stories” and “false news” their viewers are consuming via other media outlets.


Do the terms “fake stories” and “false news” ring a bell?

GIF via Robin Sayer/Deadspin/YouTube.

Yes, they echo President Donald Trump’s debunked claims that the “fake news” media is hellbent on destroying his administration.

And no, that’s definitely not a coincidence.

Sinclair Broadcast Group’s executive chairman is David Smith, a Trump backer with ties to the White House.

The video above, edited and published by Deadspin, was a mash-up of several Sinclair affiliates airing this disturbing segment.

“Sinclair’s probably the most dangerous company most people have never heard of,” Michael Copps, the George W. Bush-appointed former chairman of FCC, told The Guardian in August 2017.

While Sinclair may not be a household name, most households have been swayed by the company. It’s the largest broadcast news corporation in the U.S., owning or operating nearly 200 stations coast-to-coast. And if a new move to obtain Tribune Media is approved — which is likely under the Trump administration — Sinclair will be able to reach at least 70% of U.S. households.

Photo by William Thomas Cain/Getty Images.

For what it’s worth, many journalists working for Sinclair stations have spoken out anonymously against these script-reading requirements, slamming them as “manipulative” of their viewers. Others have expressed how difficult it is for TV anchors to quit; according to one Sinclair reporter, they can often be forced to pay a hefty sum (as much as 40%!) if they quit before their contract is up.

Two particularly disturbing ideas are sneakily pushed onto viewers through these segments.

One is that the Sinclair reporters have been forced to promote the White House narrative that much of the media is biased — and therefore, cannot be trusted. “Unfortunately, some members of the media use their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control exactly what people think,” the reporters say in the segment. “This is extremely dangerous to a democracy.”

The script doesn’t name particular reports or specific, untrustworthy sources as being inaccurate. It vaguely describes ”some members of the media” as having ulterior motives, intentionally sowing doubt in the broader free press.  

Secondly, the script suggests to the viewer that only the conservative Sinclair stations — unlike its competitors or other sources — are the truly trustworthy ones.

”It’s our responsibility to pursue and report the truth,” the script reads. ”We understand truth is neither politically left nor right. Our commitment to factual reporting is the foundation of our credibility, now more than ever.”

Except that’s not the case.

”Really, what [Sinclair is] doing is kind of like the Fox [News’] ‘fair and balanced’ slogan,” CNN's Brian Stelter reported. ”It's a way of saying, ‘We’re fair, but everybody else is biased.’ It's taking a page out of Trump's playbook.”

Although disturbing, this mandatory new script-reading isn’t entirely shocking to those who’ve been paying attention.

Sinclair — which hired former Trump advisor Boris Epshteyn as a chief political analyst — has already been slammed for packaging conservative, pro-Trump commentary pieces alongside its news coverage, blurring the lines between opinion segments and fact-based reporting.

Here’s one segment featuring Epshteyn where he defended Trump’s controversial response to the gathering of neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, Virginia, after a white supremacist took the life of innocent protester Heather Heyer:

As Think Progress reported in October 2017:

“Sinclair often defends the must-run segments by arguing that they don’t take up much time, but the short packaging is part of what makes the programming so insidious. They’re slotted into local newscasts easily and not clearly marked as opinion or required programming. The segments run on 174 stations currently owned by Sinclair, which is aggressively expanding.”

What’s more, some have argued Sinclair’s cozy relationship with the Trump White House has allowed the company to skirt around media monopoly regulations as it continues to grow in scope and influence, The Guardian reported.

Americans deserve unbiased news reporting, free of corporate sway and special interest influence.

Where do we draw the line?

John Oliver slammed Sinclair on “Last Week Tonight.”

Oliver reported on Sinclair’s local news influence last summer, but dished on the new script-reading requirements on April 1.

You can watch below:

Click here to see if you watch a local news affiliate owned or operated by Sinclair Broadcast Group.

This article originally appeared on August 27, 2015

Oh, society! We have such a complicated relationship with relationships.

It starts early, with the movies we are plopped in front of as toddlers.

Keep Reading Show less

This article originally appeared on August 27, 2015

Oh, society! We have such a complicated relationship with relationships.

It starts early, with the movies we are plopped in front of as toddlers.

Keep Reading Show less
True

Each year, an estimated 1.8 million people in the United States are affected by cancer — most commonly cancers of the breast, lung, prostate, and blood cancers such as leukemia. While not everyone overcomes the disease, thanks to science, more people are surviving — and for longer — than ever before in history.

We asked three people whose lives have been impacted by cancer to share their stories – how their lives were changed by the disease, and how they're using that experience to change the future of cancer treatments with the hope that ultimately, in the fight against cancer, science will win. Here's what they had to say.

Celine Ryan, 55, engineer database programmer and mother of five from Detroit, MI

Photo courtesy of Celine Ryan

In September 2013, Celine Ryan woke up from a colonoscopy to some traumatic news. Her gastroenterologist showed her a picture of the cancerous mass they found during the procedure.

Ryan and her husband, Patrick, had scheduled a colonoscopy after discovering some unusual bleeding, so the suspicion she could have cancer was already there. Neither of them, however, were quite prepared for the results to be positive -- or for the treatment to begin so soon. Just two days after learning the news, Ryan had surgery to remove the tumor, part of her bladder, and 17 cancerous lymph nodes. Chemotherapy and radiation soon followed.

Ryan's treatment was rigorous – but in December 2014, she got the devastating news that the cancer, once confined to her colon, had spread to her lungs. Her prognosis, they said, was likely terminal.

But rather than give up hope, Ryan sought support from online research, fellow cancer patients and survivors, and her medical team. When she brought up immunotherapy to her oncologist, he quickly agreed it was the best course of action. Ryan's cancer, like a majority of colon and pancreatic cancers, had been caused by a defect on the gene KRAS, which can result in a very aggressive cancer that is virtually "undruggable." According to the medical literature, the relatively smooth protein structure of the KRAS gene meant that designing inhibitors to bind to surface grooves and treat the cancer has been historically difficult. Through her support systems, Ryan discovered an experimental immunotherapy trial at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, MD., and called them immediately to see if she was eligible. After months of trying to determine whether she was a suitable candidate for the experimental treatment, Ryan was finally accepted.

The treatment, known as tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy, or TIL, is a testament to how far modern science has evolved. With this therapy, doctors remove a tumor and harvest special immune cells that are found naturally in the tumor. Doctors then grow the cells in a lab over the next several weeks with a protein that promotes rapid TIL growth – and once the cells number into the billions, they are infused back into the patient's body to fight the cancer. On April 1, 2015, Ryan had her tumor removed at the NIH. Two months later, she went inpatient for four weeks to have the team "wash out" her immune system with chemotherapy and infuse the cells – all 148 billion of them – back into her body.

Six weeks after the infusion, Ryan and Patrick went back for a follow-up appointment – and the news they got was stunning: Not only had no new tumors developed, but the six existing tumors in her lungs had shrunk significantly. Less than a year after her cell infusion, in April 2016, the doctors told Ryan news that would have been impossible just a decade earlier: Thanks to the cell infusion, Ryan was now considered NED – no evaluable disease. Her body was cancer-free.

Ryan is still NED today and continuing annual follow-up appointments at the NIH, experiencing things she never dreamed she'd be able to live to see, such as her children's high school and college graduations. She's also donating her blood and cells to the NIH to help them research other potential cancer treatments. "It was an honor to do so," Ryan said of her experience. "I'm just thrilled, and I hope my experience can help a lot more people."

Patrice Lee, PhD, VP of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Exploratory Development at Pfizer

Photo courtesy of Patrice Lee

Patrice Lee got into scientific research in an unconventional way – through the late ocean explorer Jacques Cousteau.

Lee never met Cousteau but her dreams of working with him one day led her to pursue a career in science. Initially, Lee completed an undergraduate degree in marine biology; eventually, her interests changed and she decided to get a dual doctoral degree in physiology and toxicology at Duke University. She now works at Pfizer's R&D site in Boulder, CO (formerly Array BioPharma), leading a group of scientists who determine the safety and efficacy of new oncology drugs.

"Scientists focused on drug discovery and development in the pharmaceutical industry are deeply committed to inventing new therapies to meet unmet needs," Lee says, describing her field of work. "We're driven to achieve new medicines and vaccines as quickly as possible without sacrificing safety."

Among the drugs Lee has helped develop during her career, including cancer therapies, she says around a dozen are currently in development, while nine have received FDA approval — an incredible accomplishment as many scientists spend their careers without seeing their drug make it to market. Lee's team is particularly interested in therapies for brain metastases — something that Lee says is a largely unmet need in cancer research, and something her team is working on from a variety of angles. "Now that we've had rapid success with mRNA vaccine technology, we hope to explore what the future holds when applying this technology to cancers," Lee says.

But while evaluating potential cancer therapies is a professional passion of Lee's, it's also a mission that's deeply personal. "I'm also a breast cancer survivor," she says. "So I've been on the other side of things and have participated in a clinical trial."

However, seeing how melanoma therapies that she helped develop have affected other real-life cancer patients, she says, has been a highlight of her career. "We had one therapy that was approved for patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma," Lee recalls. "Our team in Boulder was graced by a visit from a patient that had benefited from these drugs that we developed. It was a very special moment for the entire team."

None of these therapies would be available, Lee says without rigorous science behind it: "Facts come from good science. Facts will drive the development of new drugs, and that's what will help patients."

Chiuying "Cynthia" Kuk (they/them) MS, 34, third-year medical student at Michigan State University College of Human Medicine

Photo courtesy of Cynthia Kuk

Cynthia Kuk was just 10 years old when they had a conversation that would change their life forever.

"My mother, who worked as a translator for the government at the time, had been diagnosed with breast cancer, and after her chemotherapy treatments she would get really sick," Kuk, who uses they/them pronouns, recalls. "When I asked my dad why mom was puking so much, he said it was because of the medicine she was taking that would help her get better."

Kuk's response was immediate: "That's so stupid! Why would a medicine make you feel worse instead of better? When I'm older, I want to create medicine that won't make people sick like that."

Nine years later, Kuk traveled from their native Hong Kong to the United States to do exactly that. Kuk enrolled in a small, liberal arts college for their Bachelor's degree, and then four years later started a PhD program in cancer research. Although Kuk's mother was in remission from her cancer at the time, Kuk's goal was the same as it had been as a 10-year-old watching her suffer through chemotherapy: to design a better cancer treatment, and change the landscape of cancer research forever.

Since then, Kuk's mission has changed slightly.

"My mom's cancer relapsed in 2008, and she ended up passing away about five years after that," Kuk says. "After my mom died, I started having this sense of urgency. Cancer research is such that you work for twenty years, and at the end of it you might have a fancy medication that could help people, but I wanted to help people now." With their mother still at the forefront of their mind, Kuk decided to quit their PhD program and enter medical school.

Now, Kuk plans to pursue a career in emergency medicine – not only because they are drawn to the excitement of the emergency room, but because the ER is a place where the most marginalized people tend to seek care.

"I have a special interest in the LGBTQ+ population, as I identify as queer and nonbinary," says Kuk. "A lot of people in this community and other marginalized communities access care through the ER and also tend to avoid medical care since there is a history of mistreatment and judgement from healthcare workers. How you carry yourself as a doctor, your compassion, that can make a huge difference in someone's care."

In addition to making a difference in the lives of LGBTQ+ patients, Kuk wants to make a difference in the lives of patients with cancer as well, like their mother had.

"We've diagnosed patients in the Emergency Department with cancer before," Kuk says. "I can't make cancer good news but how you deliver bad news and the compassion you show could make a world of difference to that patient and their family."

During their training, Kuk advocates for patients by delivering compassionate and inclusive care, whether they happen to have cancer or not. In addition to emphasizing their patient's pronouns and chosen names, they ask for inclusive social and sexual histories as well as using gender neutral language. In doing this, they hope to make medicine as a whole more accessible for people who have been historically pushed aside.

"I'm just one person, and I can't force everyone to respect you, if you're marginalized," Kuk says. "But I do want to push for a culture where people appreciate others who are different from them."