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
-
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 outdated?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.
-
yeah i think it's on ssc's side on this one esp like u said given other internet pieces, just an old institution with a lot of old rules (which exist for a reason! but need updating) just think it's dumb to make everything into some big media conspiracy
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.