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

AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

semafor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 181 posts

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#151

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

trompetenaccoun wrote: post #39
Dieselroar88 wrote: post #23

It seems like the actual story here is entirely ignored: Why are a bunch of journalists concerned with how fast they can send out a push notification?? is the world that creates that incentive healthy? What can we do to remove the incentive that led to people having this kind of a discussion on a slack channel while one dude is at a doctors appointment? This seems like an utter failure of the editorial process in thi…

On the plus side, we now live in a time where more such internals come to light (at least in Western democracies with free press) and news consumers can make their own informed choices which sources they read and trust. I've personally come to view AP more critical over the past years long before the rocket story. Their quality has gotten worse and they've become slightly political which a news agency should never be…

I saw an AP article recently that was obviously biased. The word choice the omissions on a topic I know a lot about. I did a double take on it.

Turns out the author is an AP journalist, but works for CNN and has a long history of misrepresenting and omitting the facts about this topic.

I agree AP is on the down slope.

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#152

Post by mongol »

harry8 wrote: post #96

I have doubts about whether a source who has supplied misinformation should continue to be given anonymity. Is this unfashionable? Seems that maybe should a case arise where a government official lies in a way that is consistent with getting the public to support military action, they are not a "source" and deserve no protection whatsoever. They should go from feeding the false story to being the true story in short…

Like eating the goose that lays golden eggs. Why be the source to a news org if they can suddenly turn on you and make you the news?

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#153

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #131
mc32 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who say things like “American missiles fired by Ukraine?” It would only make sense to say that if US troops on the ground hosted by Ukraine fired the missiles. It’s stupid. No one says Chinese AK-47s fired by Ukrainian soldiers. Someone was playing stupid.

> Who say things like “American missiles fired by Ukraine?” Russia-aligned internet commenters seem to say things like that a lot. I think it's part of their cope; Russia couldn't be struggling against Ukrainians... no... they're struggling against Ukrainians with American weapons! I guess this is gentler on their egos.

I mean… that is the truth though.

Without the full force of US Intelligence and more money sent to Ukraine this year than any year of the Iraq/Afghanistan war… yes, Ukraine would have folded months ago.

This is very clearly a proxy war.

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#154

Post by anshumankmr »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #133
Dieselroar88 wrote: post #23

It seems like the actual story here is entirely ignored: Why are a bunch of journalists concerned with how fast they can send out a push notification?? is the world that creates that incentive healthy? What can we do to remove the incentive that led to people having this kind of a discussion on a slack channel while one dude is at a doctors appointment? This seems like an utter failure of the editorial process in thi…

> What can we do to remove the incentive that led to people having this kind of a discussion on a slack channel while one dude is at a doctors appointment? Delete the internet, then return to newspapers published once a day. Short of that, it's hopeless. With continuous 24/7 publishing, journalists race to beat each other.

Newspapers have had made very public blunders all the time, and have had extremely bad consequences already. Sure the internet has made it worse, but there would a difference in having comparatively localized consequences versus this, which would be technically WW3.

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#155

Post by cpleppert »

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote: post #52

> LaPorta did not exactly claim that Nixon had approved the source in this case, but his words were interpreted by the editors to mean that he did. I think that's a reasonable read. That's what I took away from it initially. He said an official source, which had been vetted, said a thing. The fact that he didn't make it clear that this source had not been vetted for this particular report is negligent at best.

One person commented specifically that the source was vetted (not the story). There was also another comment about how they couldn't believe a senior intelligence could be wrong ( so no reason to get a second source). This doesn't really make sense if the story was vetted by a senior editor. Also, why would a senior editor make any difference about the credibility of a story? Thats the reporters job. If the senior editor signed off on the story why then he would have immediately put the story out.

Either the source is wrong or LaPorta was confused about "Russian missile" i.e. was it Russian made or fired by the Russian Federation?

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#156

Post by rainonmoon »

oefrha wrote: post #140
mc32 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who say things like “American missiles fired by Ukraine?” It would only make sense to say that if US troops on the ground hosted by Ukraine fired the missiles. It’s stupid. No one says Chinese AK-47s fired by Ukrainian soldiers. Someone was playing stupid.

If you pay attention, you’ll realize media often use ambiguous titles that are technically correct, in a sense, but which most of their audience will interpret in a different and wrong way that fits their agenda. It’s really common when it comes to reporting on geopolitical rivals. Usually not this blatant, though. Btw, there are a lot of reporting on how Russia uses Chinese drones, often without mentioning Ukraine u…

I've seen it referred to as "exonerative tense" mostly in reference to how e.g. the New York Times will refer to incidents of police shooting and killing citizens.

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#157

Post by cpleppert »

mc32 wrote: post #74
remarkEon wrote: post #13

>I can’t imagine a US intelligence official would be wrong on this Has this AP reporter been asleep for … their entire career? Charitably, I can interpret this as the reporter thinking they wouldn’t make up something about a potential Article 5 event, but - and maybe it’s my cynicism about this war - wouldn’t that mean you’d want to guarantee that what you’re saying is super precise? “Russian missiles hit Poland” vs…

Who say things like “American missiles fired by Ukraine?” It would only make sense to say that if US troops on the ground hosted by Ukraine fired the missiles. It’s stupid. No one says Chinese AK-47s fired by Ukrainian soldiers. Someone was playing stupid.

>> Someone was playing stupid.

Welcome to the real world. Even if the intelligence offical was being scrupulously careful to lay out the facts the reporter may mishear or misunderstand the context. The only thing that would have been known immediately was that the missile was manufactured in the soviet union. The offical thinks he is telling the reporter one thing but the reporter just hears 'russian missile' and runs with it because he believes it comes from a verified source.

The Slack chat is pretty clear that the AP reporters here are just jumping to conclusions that fit their preconceptions. The reporters are breathlessly invoking article 5 as if a stray missile hitting a polish farm would rise to the level of a deliberate act of war.

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#158

Post by reducesuffering »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #110

Was the story false? Because Polish government sources also strongly suggested it was Russian until a meeting with Biden, where they backpedelled hard... As of right now, the Polish investigation is ongoing and it's never actually been confirmed that it's a Ukrainian missile. But the story's been buried. So was the AP source not vetted and did the journalist screw up or did officials change the narrative for politica…

Unfortunately, we the people might not know the real truth for years.

We have to acknowledge that there is a very real incentive for NATO to spike an attribution of Russian military missile on NATO in order to prevent escalation by popular demand.

High level military officials and select diplomats will be the ones with first hand info and the ability to decide the geopolitical move on what is sent to the news.

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#159

Post by harry8 »

mongol wrote: post #152
harry8 wrote: post #96

I have doubts about whether a source who has supplied misinformation should continue to be given anonymity. Is this unfashionable? Seems that maybe should a case arise where a government official lies in a way that is consistent with getting the public to support military action, they are not a "source" and deserve no protection whatsoever. They should go from feeding the false story to being the true story in short…

Like eating the goose that lays golden eggs. Why be the source to a news org if they can suddenly turn on you and make you the news?

The idea is that they do that if you manipulate them into printing a lie. Think Weapons of Mass Destruction here. Or "Putin is paying bounties to kill Americans in Afghanistan." Something that is clearly both false and fabricated for the effect it will have on the public to smooth the way for something (maybe something noble even, doesn't matter) politically by heading off public opinion.

You should be terrified of doing that if that's what you're doing. Seems like right now those pushing such lies have nothing whatsoever at stake. There is no reckoning at all when it comes out.

Is that the way it should be?

Re: AP fired reporter after dangerous blunder – Slack chats reveal chaotic process

#160

Post by mardifoufs »

morpheuskafka wrote: post #123
mardifoufs wrote: post #11

Qoah so they really threw him under the bus. Crazy that the editorial staff didn't even pause when article 5 was brought up. It seems like something you might want to really be sure about, and ask more questions on who did it (not just making sure that missiles actually landed somewhere). Extremely careless

Surely the actual militaries (at least Poland and the US who would presumably be the primary decision makers) would have actual knowledge of what happened/what their confidence in that was. I believe they fairly quickly clarified that the missiles were not suspected to have come from Russia. At any rate, if they were wrong too seeing the AP publish it citing their own intelligence as a source wouldn't have made them…

They obviously wouldn't, but it could cause escalation. If Russia thought that NATO had its causis belli, it's a dangerous situation no matter what.

Again, you are right that it is not likely at all that any side would act on a mere report, but the stakes are so high that even a 1% chance of a misunderstanding is very dangerous.

Post reply on HN