I think these are excellent guidelines. If Reuters adheres to them, they'll continue to rise above the other mainstream media outlets. I suspect they'll be unlikely to come under fire from the current Administration, whose feud with the media seems to be concentrated on "info-tainment" organizations like CNN that for years now have eschewed factual reporting for titillation and talking heads.
Reuters' position on covering Trump
11–20 of 263 posts
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#12No mention that Thomson Reuters, owner of the Reuters news service, donated between $1m-$5m to Clinton. http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/clinton-foundati...
There's a slight inaccuracy here; by simply saying "donated to Clinton" you imply that the donation was to Hillary Clinton's campaign. The donation was, however, to the Clinton Foundation.
Given that the donations to the Clinton Foundation also came from conservative media outlets such as Newsmax and Fox, I'm confident that donating to the Clinton Foundation does not prove bias towards Hillary Clinton.
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#13I've seen several people suggest that covering Trump is an unprecedented challenge which news orgs have no understanding of how to handle. This is a good reminder that this isn't true; even a presidency which is exceptional by American standards is well within the familiar scope of international news organizations.
International news organizations are used to covering tin-pot autocracies around the world. Before it just always seemed bemusedly distant.
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#14So Reuter's position is that the media environment in the US is rapidly becoming like illiberal democracies in Egypt, Russia and Iran, and so its time to use skills applicable when operating within typically third world authoritarian regimes. What heart warming times we live in.
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#15Please reinstate the ban on political stories.
Is a political blog post from Jupyter a political story?
Is a discussion of whether RustConf should be held in the US a political story?
Are the Snowden leaks political stories?
Is YC funding ACLU a political story?
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#16I've seen several people suggest that covering Trump is an unprecedented challenge which news orgs have no understanding of how to handle. This is a good reminder that this isn't true; even a presidency which is exceptional by American standards is well within the familiar scope of international news organizations.
Yes, apparently the new administration isn't especially different in approach from covering warlords, post-Soviet dictators and Middle-Eastern autocrats.
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#17Please reinstate the ban on political stories.
Is a political blog post from Jupyter a political story? Is a discussion of whether RustConf should be held in the US a political story? Are the Snowden leaks political stories? Is YC funding ACLU a political story?
To quote the HN Guidelines:
Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon.
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#18Please reinstate the ban on political stories.
But haven't you heard? Trump did something people don't like so he's a fascist now. Grass roots organisations that are in touch with the common man like Apple, Google, the New York Times and the Washington post are really opposed to this. If we keep this up it's bound to make those dumb working class white people vote correctly next time.
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#19I think these are excellent guidelines. If Reuters adheres to them, they'll continue to rise above the other mainstream media outlets. I suspect they'll be unlikely to come under fire from the current Administration, whose feud with the media seems to be concentrated on "info-tainment" organizations like CNN that for years now have eschewed factual reporting for titillation and talking heads.
We can probably dial that in a little more: Fox News is certainly no better than CNN as far as talking heads goes, but the Trump Administration isn't feuding with them. Trump is feuding with talking heads who don't advance his agenda.
Re: Reuters' position on covering Trump
#20"Clinton has 90 percent chance of winning: Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation" - Nov 8 - http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKBN1...