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

Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 170 posts

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#101

Post by boomboomsubban »

adamrezich wrote: post #73
AlbertCory wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I doubt some Golden Age of news objectivity ever existed Maybe that's because you haven't read any of it? I mean, it's hard to find on the Web these days. And easy to find counter-examples even from that period. Just like it's easy to find some Victorian-era pornography and leap to the conclusion that everything then was just like now.

when was this Golden Age of News Objectivity, then? because from where I'm standing, it sure seems like it was more of a Golden Age of There Only Being A Few Accessible Sources of News, Most If Not All of Whom Were On The Same Page When It Comes To Major Stories, i.e., The Time Before Smartphones. case in point: the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. the entire United States media apparatus united to gasligh…

>case in point: the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. the entire United States media apparatus united to gaslight the populace into consenting to an foreign-soil military invasion on incredibly shaky grounds, that were later proven to be completely false

The invasion of Afghanistan was over their harboring of Bin Laden, and there's very strong evidence he was there until shortly after the start of the war. I have plenty of criticism of the Afghanistan war, for starters the invasion was illegal under international law, but the "reason" we invaded was likely true.

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#102

Post by fsckboy »

stusmall wrote: post #55
glonq wrote: post #35

I hate to sound like a grumpy old man [especially because I'm not...] but I'm increasingly discouraged by both (1) the media's willingness to abandon any sense of ethics or integrity, and (2) the public's willingness to unquestioningly consume everything that such media produces. We somehow crossed over an invisible line that separates "cheeky hyperbole" from "outright deceit and lies" and nobody noticed.

If it helps you feel better, this is in a thread about them getting caught and called out. There are some horrifically bad actors in our media landscape right now who are more than happy to lie or label opinion shows as "news" if makes their stock price goes up. It's good to see serious, well respected news outlets like NPR doing the hard work and calling others out on their BS.

[flagged]

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#103

Post by hersko »

stusmall wrote: post #55
glonq wrote: post #35

I hate to sound like a grumpy old man [especially because I'm not...] but I'm increasingly discouraged by both (1) the media's willingness to abandon any sense of ethics or integrity, and (2) the public's willingness to unquestioningly consume everything that such media produces. We somehow crossed over an invisible line that separates "cheeky hyperbole" from "outright deceit and lies" and nobody noticed.

If it helps you feel better, this is in a thread about them getting caught and called out. There are some horrifically bad actors in our media landscape right now who are more than happy to lie or label opinion shows as "news" if makes their stock price goes up. It's good to see serious, well respected news outlets like NPR doing the hard work and calling others out on their BS.

I was going to point out how NPR dropped the ball [1] on the Hunter Biden story, but then found this followup [2] and i'm not sure how i feel. Is it a correction? A copout? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[1] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/npr-explained-why-its-not-... [2] https://www.npr.org/2022/04/09/1091859822/more-details-emerg...

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#104

Post by wytewulf »

burkaman wrote: post #71
derefr wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The sources are trustworthy or not Read that quote carefully — there's two layers to it. The source is "familiar with the matter" — the journalist trusts what they have to say. What the source says, though, is that federal agents allegedly found classified information. In other words, the source claims that the federal agents themselves are claiming this ; but the source does not put any credence in this claim, and…

Yes that's fine, and a great use of the word allegedly, but it's not fine to pick and choose which alleged allegations from the same source you include, and replace their unverified allegations with your own. Source: Federal agents found classified documents and CSAM on his computer. Rolling Stone: Federal agents allegedly found classified documents on his computer. The question looms on what grounds the feds would h…

Im posting this as an alt for what I think are obvious reasons.

If you're good at searching google, duckduckgo, various tor search engines and IPFS, child porn is not hard to find. (It is NOT my thing, btw. Ive ran across it in some tor researching. Alas.) However, in most states, possession is a statutory charge. To that end, it means if images end up on a computer , and there's an anonymous tip, its going to end badly, cause with the statutory nature, simple possession is highly illegal.

Now to be fair, Stallman got into hot water due to his lacklustre way of expressing this issue. It's documentation of a heinous crime - one that should likely be a death penalty case - but the images themselves shouldn't carry criminal charge, let alone a statutory criminal charge. Frankly, thats due to how easy they are to acquire, and of a "youre guilty due to simple possession" aspect, even if you were unaware.

I also have to wonder, since a journalist doing research into classified govt stuff.. It's really easy to plant those images, and then find them. And you don't even need to hack into a computer. Just leave a thumbdrive hanging around with a label like "hard candy" in the premises, and instant 100+ year felony charge with automatic public assumption of guilt. Having such a "child porn charge" against a journalist doing sensitive research is certainly a great way to get that person permanently out of your hair, and to send a message to anyone else foolish enough to go near their work.

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#105

Post by thakoppno »

mikeyouse wrote: post #100
_gabe_ wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Select Committee on Intelligence in the U.S. Senate Ah yes, the senate. How could we forget the paragons of truth? They absolutely have no incentives to lie or make hyperbolic claims to support any agendas. They're the epitome of our humble faithful civil servants.

The Republican Senate report verified nearly all of the points in the Mueller report. Their incentives were 100% aligned with finding nothing and yet.. https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/docu... The irony of people in this thread not reading primary sources and instead relying on weird "news" reports that nothing was found is a bit much.

> While the Committee does not describe the final result as a complete picture, this volume provides the most comprehensive description to date of Russia's activities and the threat they posed.

Subsequent to the Senate report, has any information corroborated the allegations about Manefort?

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#106

Post by AlbertCory »

adamrezich wrote: post #73
AlbertCory wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I doubt some Golden Age of news objectivity ever existed Maybe that's because you haven't read any of it? I mean, it's hard to find on the Web these days. And easy to find counter-examples even from that period. Just like it's easy to find some Victorian-era pornography and leap to the conclusion that everything then was just like now.

when was this Golden Age of News Objectivity, then? because from where I'm standing, it sure seems like it was more of a Golden Age of There Only Being A Few Accessible Sources of News, Most If Not All of Whom Were On The Same Page When It Comes To Major Stories, i.e., The Time Before Smartphones. case in point: the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. the entire United States media apparatus united to gasligh…

Please reread the point about Victorian porn, and how that "proves" sexual mores have never changed (it doesn't).

If we actually wanted to argue this: citing a few stories from back when, in which one really cannot discern the reporter's politics, will not do it. You can just argue, "that's one example. Look, here's this biased shit from the same period, see? Nothing's changed!"

No, if we wanted to argue if things have changed, we'd have to find someone who practiced journalism back then (as I did not). OR - we'd look at what the Journalism schools were teaching, except that many working journalists didn't get degrees in Journalism. OR maybe the manuals that media outlets gave to their reporters, if such things existed.

As for "post-9/11", you're already 30-40 years too late.

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#107

Post by paulpauper »

Disturbing stuff

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Gordon_Meek#Investigatio...

Shame on Rolling Stone for omitting this

It's hard to find any way to defend Rolling Stone's actions. It's actions in 2014 showed it cannot be trusted as a reputable source.

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#108

Post by [deleted] »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #97
romellem wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The whole entire "Russiagate" thing was straight up just a hoax Uhhh, what? The Select Committee on Intelligence in the U.S. Senate [published][1] a nearly 1,000 page report on this. Volume 5 begins with these findings : > The Committee found that the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multi-faceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. > The fifth an…

Russiagate was not about the Russian interference in the 2016 elections, it was the claim that the Trump team was explicitly coordinating with Russian interference in the 2016 election. The interference happened, the evidence of coordination is weak at best.

[deleted]

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#109

Post by adamrezich »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #101
adamrezich wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when was this Golden Age of News Objectivity, then? because from where I'm standing, it sure seems like it was more of a Golden Age of There Only Being A Few Accessible Sources of News, Most If Not All of Whom Were On The Same Page When It Comes To Major Stories, i.e., The Time Before Smartphones. case in point: the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. the entire United States media apparatus united to gasligh…

>case in point: the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. the entire United States media apparatus united to gaslight the populace into consenting to an foreign-soil military invasion on incredibly shaky grounds, that were later proven to be completely false The invasion of Afghanistan was over their harboring of Bin Laden, and there's very strong evidence he was there until shortly after the start of the war.…

bro they gaslit the whole country into being islamophobes for a solid few years there so we'd agree with the invasion of Afghanistan, predicated upon a former CIA asset supposedly having had some hand in 9/11, and then got us to invade Iraq because of unsubstantiated and ultimately false claims as to the existence of "WMDs," and then, afterward, they told us how shamefully evil we were for having spent half of the 00s being islamophobes (which was the case only because they gaslit us into being as such).

and we just rolled with it, blamed Bush at the end and called it a day, because hey, look, this hip young black senator is running for office and he's gonna Hope and Change everything and make it better (which didn't end up happening).

the news media has not been a force for good in my entire lifetime, but almost nobody (myself included) started seriously questioning it until a few years ago.

Re: Rolling Stone left out the reason why FBI raided journalist's home

#110

Post by ChickenNugger »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #97
romellem wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The whole entire "Russiagate" thing was straight up just a hoax Uhhh, what? The Select Committee on Intelligence in the U.S. Senate [published][1] a nearly 1,000 page report on this. Volume 5 begins with these findings : > The Committee found that the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multi-faceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. > The fifth an…

Russiagate was not about the Russian interference in the 2016 elections, it was the claim that the Trump team was explicitly coordinating with Russian interference in the 2016 election. The interference happened, the evidence of coordination is weak at best.

The reply: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35251387 was posted 12 minutes after the 25,228 word article I linked. They didn't read it.
Post reply on HN