121–130 of 527 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How’s that? Seems like it’s just saying “we’re not going to treat you like a journalist if you don’t claim to be one, and you can’t claim to be one without having done any work before.”
> "this site will only cover individuals who self-identify as journalists and have some track record of journalistic work" They're saying that they use journalistic work as a standard of who's a journalist... that's circular.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, it's a double-edged sword. On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. On the other side, now that everyone is a reporter, people roll around inside whichever cocoon of bias makes them feel the best. It's very frustrating, and overwhelming.
> On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. This is not what I see happening. Instead what happens is people see news they disagree with and deem it biased. So they find a news outlet that they agree with and decide that’s the real news.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, it's a double-edged sword. On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. On the other side, now that everyone is a reporter, people roll around inside whichever cocoon of bias makes them feel the best. It's very frustrating, and overwhelming.
> On one side, the death of traditional journalism really has opened up folks' eyes to bias in reporting. Having one or two main-stream news sources really opens up the possibility for bias becoming truth. This is not what I see happening. Instead what happens is people see news they disagree with and deem it biased. So they find a news outlet that they agree with and decide that’s the real news.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in Portland and watched many of these press people via Twitter. The reality is that many of these “press” are activists who document their activism and the activism of their comrades. They call themselves press, but they are press+activist. As a result they are often in the crowd of people throwing stuff at police, while screaming “hey you fucking fascist, aren’t you embarassed to be an authoritarian?” I am no…
Well I think you almost nailed the point - when the police declare a riot, and start rounding everyone up who doesn't disperse, the media gets rolled up with that as well many times - especially if you are livestreaming via a gopro and not with a NBC news truck (though we saw journalists with institutional backing get hit with rubber bullets this year as well)
Reminder that a CNN journalist was arrested during a live broadcast this year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftLzQefpBvM
I'm not sure riot declarations are supposed to allow the police to arrest journalists this way. (And if they are, we should challenge them on Constitutional grounds.)
The number of arrests is certainly concerning, but I think there is a lot to consider with 2020 and that statistic alone isn't enough for me to conclude we are sliding into an authoritarian police state. It's definitely something that should be investigated further, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a completely circular definition (as far as I can see).
I think it's more of a "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck." If you call yourself a journalist and have a record of reporting on things, then by this definition you are one. But you can't decide you are a persecuted journalist because you got arrested.
One line from the report jumped out at me as I was skimming it: > About half the journalists here are freelancers, who may lack the institutional support of a newsroom and the financial resources for a potentially expensive legal defense. I hadn't really thought of the value of legal defense from journalism institutions (as opposed to non-institutional platforms like Substack) before.
Nothing like one of these threads to remind us that "Hacker" News is full authoritarian and fascist sympathizers.
It’s also good to see how the far left thinks every one that isn’t 100% with them is a fascist.
This has turned the "center" into a compromise between having rights and not having them rather than a compromise between best ways to administer government while respecting an agreed-upon set of rights.
You can be a centrist somewhere between left and right and still come down on the side of rights & freedoms every time.
In some protests, when things get violent, is it easy to spot a journalist or do they just look like other protestors? honest question.