sigh. Hopefully NYT decides against printing the full name. Is there any reason to insist on doing so?https://twitter.com/orthonormalist/status/1275310856465604611 …
Show this thread
-
I’m really so confused too - would they even really get that many more clicks by using the real name vs leaving it as a pseudonym? I really don’t get it. It just seems like basic violation of consent by
@nytimesShow this thread
honestly it's just the reporter defaulting to standard journalistic practice and declining to think harder about making an exception, and while i think "scott alexander" is more than enough here, framing it as "doxxing for clicks" is incredibly disingenuous on ssc's part
-
-
like there are a variety of reasons to not print the last name, him being a psychiatrist is a p good reason and they should probably grant semi anonymity the way they do for lots of internet ppl but this framing is just.......ssc creating outrage for clicks lmao
-
Hrm. Yeah. Journalistic standard practice seems like the most likely explanation but also... outdated? It’s not uncommon to respect requests for anonymity afaict in random tech trends, or maybe NYT has more internal processes to approve that? Idk.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The explanation given by the reporter makes that the most likely scenario for me. It seems like a lot of people just want to will a war into existence.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.