Cc @ryangrim. Sincere request here.https://twitter.com/neeratanden/status/931189391967576064 …
How would the update read? Sincere reply: the emails were authentic. The motivation of the hackers (presumably Russia) and the publisher (Wikileaks) are very interesting/newsworthy, but don't reflect on the emails themselves, right?
-
-
The update could read at the top that the emails were stolen, that US authorities find they were stolen by Russia and the source providing them was colluding with the Trump campaign- link to today's story. All true. So why not add for your readers' understanding?
-
who's going back and reading all those old stories? They're coming for the ACA right now as we speak. Updating old stories that arent being read doesn't seem kuje a good use of time. If there's some code that could do it, then I don't see why not
-
I assume passage of time does not mean you no longer care about accuracy and context of stories. A simple search can find the stories. Same update can be attached to all stories. Doesn't seem hard to me.
-
Penny for your thoughts Ryan
-
I'm open to the idea, but worry about setting a precedent that all old stories be updated not because they're inaccurate, but with new info. Should we go back and update all the Keystone stories with the news of the spill? Where does it end?
-
I edited most of those stories. They were totally accurate. The provenance of the emails, in retrospect, is fascinating and troubling, but doesn't take away from their often breathtaking newsworthiness, then and now, i.e.: https://theintercept.com/2016/10/07/excerpts-of-hillary-clintons-paid-speeches-to-goldman-sachs-finally-leaked/ … 1/2
-
I find it fascinating how European media treated wikileaks dumps was so different than you, others here did Dan. Perhaps rather than rationalize your actions, you'll think about that. Fact that your source was colluding w the Trump campaign doesn't make you think any differently?
-
Two ways to look at this Neera: 1. Either these people are too fucking dumb to see what was obvious to millions, that Assange was colluding w Trump & Russia, or 2. They are too fucking cynical & live for clicks, truth & decency be damned
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Exactly. Thank you for saying that, Ryan. Seems so obvious but I rarely hear it said on TV, etc.
-
At HuffPost, where I was at the time, we always included language to the effect that intel folks suspected the emails were hacked by Russia. Which is definitely interesting and a story in its own right, but yeah, doesn't change the emails
-
Lovely. We got to see one side’s emails, hacked and distributed by someone we now know wanted to harm that side, but I am glad to know we’ll do it again bc it was just so INTERESTING to read Neera’s private emails!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What was so interesting about those emails, Ryan? What exactly did we learn that goes beyond gossip?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Constantly amazes me that folks at CAP like Neera here are all aghast at foreign influence of our elections but have no qualms about millionaires and billionaires directly influencing public policy domestically...
#SAD -
Neera is for public financing of elections, my uninformed Justice Dem Talking Point Spouter
-
And as soon as CAP stops accepting private donations from special interests...I’ll believe her
-
CAP receives less than 6% of its funding from corporations and discloses all of them. CAP also isn’t running for office
-
Now about people who ARE running for office: Gonna condemn this guy, Jake? :)http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bernie-sanders-regular-luxurious-dscc-fundraising-retreats …
- 1 more reply
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.