Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

thecorrespondent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#31

Post by aww_dang »

triceratops wrote: post #28
tathougies wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true. The democratic party has not committed to a safe transition of power. Clinton has told Biden to not concede, even if he loses. The Atlantic has pieces saying that the Democrats should not concede: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/democrats-... . Biden, as far as I know, has not said anything specific on the matter.

> The Atlantic has pieces saying that the Democrats should not concede You should really read the article. Because a couple of words in the headline are playing into your confirmation bias and misleading you. FTA: "I find myself truly worried about only one scenario: that Trump will win reelection and Democrats and others on the left will be unwilling, even unable, to accept the result." Not really the same thing as…

Here's some more in-depth coverage of Podesta's war gaming, Clinton's suggestion that Biden should not concede and the resulting media spin.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/11/the-left-is-setting-the...

https://spectator.us/top-democrats-contemplate-civil-war-bid...

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#32

Post by thrwy222 »

coagmano wrote: post #2

I've always thought hackers/security folks have better politics (in both directions) because they're used to thinking in terms of systems. I would love if journalists also took the time to think about how the parties use the equivalent of social engineering to control the news cycle and bring about changes that aren't healthy for journalism or democracy

On the other hand, if journalists thought more about how the news cycle/public is nefariously manipulated, journalists might just get better at nefariously manipulating it. It's certainly within their economic interest.

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#33

Post by tathougies »

triceratops wrote: post #28
tathougies wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true. The democratic party has not committed to a safe transition of power. Clinton has told Biden to not concede, even if he loses. The Atlantic has pieces saying that the Democrats should not concede: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/democrats-... . Biden, as far as I know, has not said anything specific on the matter.

> The Atlantic has pieces saying that the Democrats should not concede You should really read the article. Because a couple of words in the headline are playing into your confirmation bias and misleading you. FTA: "I find myself truly worried about only one scenario: that Trump will win reelection and Democrats and others on the left will be unwilling, even unable, to accept the result." Not really the same thing as…

The Atlantic is a left-leaning publication. They posted the article as if not conceding would be an appropriate reaction. I have read the article (multiple times at this point), and I have come to the same conclusion: while not outright instructing them not to concede, it is normalizing not conceding.

And yes, the title is incredibly leading. If it were an article about how some republicans may choose to not concede, the article would be titled 'Why the GOP won't concede the election'. It should have been similarly titled for the Dems, but of course, it's not, because it's being normalized.

With regards to clinton... Another commenter posted articles linking to the tweet. And you're giving her more benefit of the doubt than trump. Trump has said he will concede if fair. You are now wondering if Clinton's call to not concede is really just a call to not concede until the election is fairly settled while attempting to draw a difference between the two.

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#34

Post by whatever1 »

tathougies wrote: post #33
triceratops wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Atlantic has pieces saying that the Democrats should not concede You should really read the article. Because a couple of words in the headline are playing into your confirmation bias and misleading you. FTA: "I find myself truly worried about only one scenario: that Trump will win reelection and Democrats and others on the left will be unwilling, even unable, to accept the result." Not really the same thing as…

The Atlantic is a left-leaning publication. They posted the article as if not conceding would be an appropriate reaction. I have read the article (multiple times at this point), and I have come to the same conclusion: while not outright instructing them not to concede, it is normalizing not conceding. And yes, the title is incredibly leading. If it were an article about how some republicans may choose to not concede,…

"Trump has said he will concede if fair."

Sorry for the bad language, but What The Hell does this mean in a well established democracy? Is this a statement that a leader of a well-governed state can put out for his own country?

We are talking about the USA not a banana republic. And somehow this behavior has been normalized.

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#35

Post by aww_dang »

whatever1 wrote: post #34
tathougies wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Atlantic is a left-leaning publication. They posted the article as if not conceding would be an appropriate reaction. I have read the article (multiple times at this point), and I have come to the same conclusion: while not outright instructing them not to concede, it is normalizing not conceding. And yes, the title is incredibly leading. If it were an article about how some republicans may choose to not concede,…

"Trump has said he will concede if fair." Sorry for the bad language, but What The Hell does this mean in a well established democracy? Is this a statement that a leader of a well-governed state can put out for his own country? We are talking about the USA not a banana republic. And somehow this behavior has been normalized.

It means that regardless of the results on election night, there's a reasonable probability that lawyers and possibly the supreme court will become involved.

>What does this mean in a well established democracy?

As the established democratic institutions declined in Rome, the cesar was selected by the praetorian guard. Similarly in the US's we see intelligence agencies and Federal law enforcement agencies conspiring to undermine the legitimacy of the Presidency. This was most visible in the failed attempt to impeach him for alleged connections to Russia.

From this perspective, it is possible to understand an unwillingness to accept an "unfair" outcome resulting from fraud or other interference as preservation of the republic. The decline of democratic government was foretold by Plato.

Of course for those who are prone to compare the President to an autocrat, ignoring this decline or blaming Trump for it may seem reasonable. However, it is possible to interpret the unwillingness to concede with good faith.

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#36

Post by Craighead »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #20
the_only_law wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tucker Carlson thinks marijuana legalization is a massive conspiracy to pacify the youth and make them more compliant. I dont particularly give a damn about the mainstream media, but I'm not going to pretend Carlson is a paragon of intelligent political analysis either.

It's not that Tucker's an oracle. It's that sometime in the last 30 years the tenets of the journalistic priesthood have changed. In the past the (aspirational) goal was to provide the public with the facts; now it's to provide the (interpreted) Truth. Biased media is nothing new. It just used to be biased in different, opposing directions. What's new is that journalists finally found something they could all agree o…

Thank you Ronald Reagan

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#37

Post by yaypolitics »

As long as journalists continue to pretend the entire Steele dossier wasn’t fabricated, as long as they continue to push false narratives about Russian interference, I’m willing to turn a blind eye should anything bad happen to them.

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#38

Post by yaypolitics »

the_only_law wrote: post #13
hintymad wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tucker Carlson just broke the record for most-watched month of any cable news show ever. If that offends you as a journalist, it's probably time for some introspection. I admire your optimism, but there won't be introspection. They will and already have labeled Carlson far-right, bigot, racist, sexist, liar, and you name it. His show broke the record because more than half of American population are basket of deplo…

Tucker Carlson thinks marijuana legalization is a massive conspiracy to pacify the youth and make them more compliant. I dont particularly give a damn about the mainstream media, but I'm not going to pretend Carlson is a paragon of intelligent political analysis either.

Oh noooes not my heckin weederinos. The kiddos should be allowed to get 420 blazed up my dudes! Marijuana makes children smarter, it’s important we get them started early to expand their minds maaan. Did you know Carl Sagan also toked up? We are all star dust my friend, light one up for my homie Sagan. Alright, Reddit out. The bacon narwhals at midnight.

Re: To protect democracy, journalists need to learn to think like hackers and spies

#40

Post by dredmorbius »

Seems to me there's much discussion not related at all to the substance of the article. I was hoping for better than this.

The recommendation: the big national news providers – ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NPR, PBS, AP, Reuters, The New York Times, The Washington Post – should have threat modelling teams, just as they all have pollsters. These teams would try to identify the most serious threats to a free and fair election and to US democracy over the next three months, so that their newsrooms can take appropriate action.

Post reply on HN