*week before last, that is...
Actually @shearm & I interviewed Miller WH before last for our piece on the evolution of the family separation tactic, & after the fact, The Daily decided to do an episode based on that conversation. WH would not allow audio to be used.
-
-
-
Was the audio originally off the record? I don’t understand how this is allowed.
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Questions: Do reporters make their own decisions about giving the WH veto power over the use of their interviews in exchange for access? When you say "the WH would not allow," who are you talking about? What do you feel your primary obligation is here?
-
I feel like I’m in bizarro land. I’ve never heard of a public official having that kind of veto power.
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Add me to the list of journalists confused by the WH getting to decide something is off the record after the fact.
-
While you were sleeping, this hit and very few are reporting it.https://twitter.com/cjcmichel/status/1009044773179707393?s=21 …
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Run the story with audio. First amendment. Let the chips fall where they may.
-
I recall a time when a VOA reporter had an interview w president of Haiti. Some of his comments were interpreted to be a call to arms. Some discussion btwn agencies about the segment or intv being dropped. Director of VOA stood his ground. First Am. Intv ran. No revolution.
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Powerful contrast in the audio we are hearing right now - the wailing of kids split from their parents ... vs the audio we’re not - the voice of one of the most important defenders of the policy behind it.
-
Why bother retweeting if you’re not going to do anything?
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.