So is this why @nytimes went after him? https://twitter.com/can/status/1276533433557151744 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Not good! NYT lets Bansky have a pseudonym and I know people hired by/write for NYT using a pen name. Short of him being an immediate danger to other humans, no justification here to use his real name even if it wasn't a big secret because NYT will dominate google results.
0 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Yeah, it sucks. No win. What was done to him is wrong. He may have had no out once NYT responded that way. This is similar to the way tech companies are inconsiderate to a little country here and there. Not okay.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Sympathy is different than respecting basic rights and minimal respect to people, though. Haven't read enough to have sympathy or not, read enough to see that there is no immediate danger to anyone's life, hence not justified to print his name without his consent.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
His blog post implying his full name is private was a load of crock and after that I have little sympathy left. You want an anonymous identity create one, this situation is someone who started with godawful opsec decided he wants to be anon and we're supposed to respect it? Why?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Because you do not want big institutions like NYT or Facebook making those decisions for people. It's not right; it's dangerous and I think many people's thinking is clouded because they don't like the guy. Same threat is true for dissidents you may like.
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.