girl you tried to justify doxing someone by saying "well he could have just replied to my email asking if there were any children at his home address I need to be worried about"https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/982113161707843596 …
-
-
2) When you ask a source BEHIND THE SCENES, WITHOUT PUBLISHING ANYTHING about something they are uncomfortable with, the thing the source does is decline and possibly off the record explain why they're no-commenting.
Afficher cette discussion -
The source does not, typically, go to Twitter war to publicize the exact thing that they don't want to talk about
Afficher cette discussion -
3) there is no big reveal in the Vice piece that gives attention to an internet conspiracy theory that hasn't ever before been seen in the media.
Afficher cette discussion -
4) November 2017: https://www.buzzfeed.com/kassycho/a-male-ceo-has-apologized-after-saying-that-this-female …pic.twitter.com/mD2V0UyUv8
Afficher cette discussion -
Engaging in both-sidesism on this is playing into what is now quite obviously just a sustained online harassment campaign masked by misdirection
Afficher cette discussion -
The world is a big place full of complicated things and this isn't one of them.
Afficher cette discussion -
Beefing on Twitter with subjects looks bad. Publications prefer to take the high road, and other journalists try to stay out of it. Honestly I'm only at this point because she literally admitted to emailing a threat and people are still out here going "well on the other hand"
Afficher cette discussion -
-
The relevant email is reproduced in the article, which you did not read, but should, because reading is good https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/3kjqdb/naomi-wu-sexy-cyborg-profile-shenzhen-maker-scene …https://twitter.com/PacoBell/status/982292582054019072 …
Afficher cette discussion -
-
I would like to stop tweeting about this but apparently I'm the last person on the internet who can read
Afficher cette discussion -
Now please stop @-ing me with random lies or misconceptions you've swallowed whole or going full epistemological uncertainty about whether or not some detail that you can't even pin down is gonna get someone vanned in China (it won't, let it go, it won't)
Afficher cette discussion
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Can I ask if you've checked with vice whether these quotes are accurate? Miscommunications happen, but "have to avoid" and "off limits" seem like clear language, no?https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/980923329606443009 …
-
They have not disputed the accuracy of those quotes.
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Yeah, that is bullshit legalese. It does not make it ethical. Since when does [....] mean yes?
-
Journalists don't and shouldn't need their subjects' consent to write about them, so this is a very strange argument
-
You would need someone's consent to write their address, you would think you would need someone's consent if certain things put them in danger. So when you talk in legal speak sure you can say journalists "don't need" that. Staying "within the law" does not mean you are innocent.
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
Hidding behind wording are we? Police asks bank robbers to please let some hostages go, they say "we understand". Hostages go out door and get killed. Kidnappers claim: police "asked" us, it was not an agreement! Zero ethics, 100% legalese. Reporters are worst than lawyers!pic.twitter.com/QQb0mCCV6R
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
so legally they are sound and morally they are the worst? Not sure that that is an excuse.
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
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.