@AnOminous I'm very surprised at how broad the definition for blackmail is.
That's that New York statute, isn't it? It is absurdly broad, but couldn't be that broad and constitutional at the same time, so the meaning of the language has almost certainly been narrowed over time.
CNN would definitely have been within their legal rights just to disclose the kid's identity, but they apparently figured out he was a kid and it would look terrible, and then for some reason chose to do something even worse, dumber, and on shaky legal ground.
Classic blackmail would be demanding money in return for not calling the cops about a crime. In this case, they're only threatening to reveal his name, and only for doing something that not only isn't a crime but isn't even illegal, and arguably isn't even shameful, although it would definitely cause him harm if revealed. What they are demanding in return for not doxing him and getting him showered with death threats and possible actual violence from unrelated parties is that he stop exercising his First Amendment rights and never say anything bad about Trump ever again.
So a global megacorporation is threatening a child for expressing an opinion, and threatening to use its global bully pulpit to sic a lynch mob on him unless he shuts up forever.
This may be legal, but it's disgusting, and anyone supporting it should be doxed themselves.
Calling trump a small-hands neo-nazi rapist in league with Russia to hack the election while insisting you're "going high" isn't the same as actually going high.
They misheard it as "let's get really high on crack."
And because it's meme time.
