Seth Rich: Hillary's Hitlist

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Seth Rich: Hillary's Hitlist

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

VikingSkull posted:

The WaPo story was independently verified by the NYT, and also the President tweeted that it was true this morning.

# ¿ May 16, 2017 15:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:38

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

VikingSkull posted:

this is GBS though we're all idiots here

I haven't looked into the Rich story, I'm just saying the WaPo story has a lot of credibility.

# ¿ May 16, 2017 15:34

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

VikingSkull posted:

ya know, it just might, and this one might too who knows

the reality is we'll never know the actual truth because the media on both sides is conditioning the population to think that anonymous sources are always correct and that is the only proof of whatever story they want to print that's needed from here on out

I'm a journalist, so obviously I'm a little biased, but anonymous sources aren't in themselves a problem. They're often necessary - whistleblowers in government and business need the protection. But they do need to be used carefully, and I think it's time for more news services to be clear about how they verify their sources, and what makes them choose to trust a source. Journalism should be transparent.

This is why it's important to know the difference between credible and not credible news, but there have been enough high-profile failures (remember NYT coverage in the Iraq runup) that I don't blame people for being distrustful. I do blame them when they then buy into news that doesn't even follow basic journalistic practices, whether it's talk radio or those million blogs that all look like HuffPo.

# ¿ May 16, 2017 15:42

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

VikingSkull posted:

That's a fair stance and I can agree to that. Unfortunately the last guy and the current one don't hold our views of whistleblower protection and the media on both ends of the political spectrum are using anonymous sources as a cudgel in an ever increasing rate.

I'm not sure how to stop it, if it can even be stopped.

You don't see anonymous sourcing much below the national level. It happens but it's rare: papers take it very seriously. It's happening a ton at the federal level right now because the Trump administration is dysfunctional. It happened to the Clinton campaign for the same reason. I think the practice seems more prominent than it is because it's so high-profile at the moment.

# ¿ May 16, 2017 15:50

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

VikingSkull posted:

Unfortunately for me I live close enough to NYC that my local affiliates are basically national level. My local paper does have more journalistic integrity than the national stuff, though.

Local papers are largely bastions of good journalism, and it's very bad for the US that they're dying.

# ¿ May 16, 2017 15:57

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

nigga crab pollock posted:

you do know the cia ran a disinfo campaign on the phrase 'conspiracy theorist' to drive a wedge into american politics after the assassination of JFK, right?

loving lmao

# ¿ May 16, 2017 16:27

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

Seth Rich died because he knew the truth about Cosmic(?) Pizza.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 02:06

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

Fushigi Yuugi fansub posted:

seth rich conspiracy being fake as gently caress does not change the fact that cnn, wapo, nyt and wsj are opinion pieces and propaganda

They're not as honest as Breitbart.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 15:34

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

8-Bit Scholar posted:

National Public Radio sold out, as far as I'm concerned nobody should be trusted now.

Public radio has the exact same flaws and failings it did 30 years ago, and it's not that they're too liberal or conservative.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 15:46

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

8-Bit Scholar posted:

They had a heavy Clinton bias throughout the election, and have increasingly been regurgitating loving Tumblr terminology of all things.

They're underwritten by the Kochs, the Waltons, the Carnegies, the Cato Institute, and other conservative organizations. The bias you think is there isn't.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 15:58

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

Also "Tumblr terminology" is just misused academic terminology because Tumblr is full of morons. But that's not where it originates.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 16:00

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

OXBALLS DOT COM posted:

Yeah it's that they're too white and also not actually publicly funded but rather dependent on donors

The biggest issue isn't their supporter funding model, or even their underwriting model. NPR has always been a public/private partnership. It's the way that the national service relies on member stations, and those member stations are often beholden to a university/small board of directors/good ol' boys club of some kind. You seem similar things in commercial media if you follow it closely. Small groups of unaccountable people are often making decisions, not reporters or editors with journalistic standards and background. Public radio has a lot of strengths - I still think it's your best option for broadcast media in the US - but these are issues worth knowing about. A lot of the decisions being made in major media aren't simple questions of bias, or even funding. They can be personal decisions made at high levels that trickle down and have a big impact.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 17:16

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

For instance, I have full confidence in Washington Post reporters, even citing anonymous stories, because I know those reporters and their editors are good. I'm familiar with their work: journalism is largely about reputation. What I have less confidence in is the company that owns WaPo, because their goal is to make money. It's why I like public media. With all its issues, it still believes in journalism as a public good, not a commodity.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 17:18

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

OXBALLS DOT COM posted:

Reputations are slow to change even when there's staff turnover and changes in leadership.

Individual reputation, not organizational. I'm more interested in who is reporting than who they're reporting for.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 17:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:38

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

OXBALLS DOT COM posted:

You actually know individual reporters?

Yes.

# ¿ May 25, 2017 18:03

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Seth Rich: Hillary's Hitlist