Welcome to Brinn's open society, bitches. Warrant Canary creator
On Oct 24, 2016 9:53 AM, "Steve Kinney" <ad...@pilobilus.net> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 10/24/2016 12:12 PM, grarpamp wrote: > > https://yro.slashdot.org/story/16/10/22/0417250/should-journalists-ign > ore-some-leaked-emails > > > > > http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/151983995587/on-the-wikileak-ed-emails-bet > ween-tanden-and > > https://backchannel.com/when-is-it-ok-to-mine-hacked-emails-1f20811229 > 15 > > > > Tuesday Lawrence Lessig issued a comment about a leaked email > > which showed complaints about his smugness from a Clinton campaign > > staffer: "I'm a big believer in leaks for the public interest... > > But I can't for the life of me see the public good in a leak like > > this..." Now mirandakatz shares an article by tech journalist > > Steven Levy arguing that instead, "The press is mining the dirty > > work of Russian hackers for gossipy inside-beltway accounts." This > > is perfectly legal. As long as journalists don't do the stealing > > themselves, they are solidly allowed to publish what thieves > > expose, especially if, as in this case, the contents are available > > to all... [But] is the exploitation of stolen personal emails a > > moral act? By diving into this corpus to expose anything unseemly > > or embarrassing, reporters may be, however unwillingly, > > participating in a scheme by a foreign power to mess with our > > election... > > > > As a 'good' journalist, I know that I'm supposed to cheer on the > > availability of information... But it's difficult to argue that > > these discoveries were unearthed by reporters for the sake of > > public good... He's sympathetic to the idea that minutiae from > > campaigns lets journalists "examine the failings of 'business as > > usual'," but "it would be so much nicer if some disgruntled > > colleague of Podesta's was providing information to reporters, > > rather than Vladimir Putin using them as stooges to undermine our > > democracy." He ultimately asks, "is it moral to amplify anything > > that's already exposed on the internet, even if the exposers are > > lawbreakers with an agenda?" > > 1) Shoot the messenger. > > 2) Question the motives of the reporter. > > 3) Misrepresent and mock the reports. > > Do we need a whole 'nother list for media criticism a.k.a. propaganda > studies? > > :o/ > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYDjxsAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqNPcH/jIsq7c2twk9kefPnxiGNToN > dAcaevbSzGZrt7V++1qP4HyD4Pey+K+r69N8uoetb9jL4YHV1p5tpEZI1DwOLwQt > oHbvui0cfKxOH6pD578LXUpoBGaFEYvbakHFkVT8ZzGCbnHB6CuyN2//ef7hrbgz > lyYIL+MfILaTPLgPhsSGUbpkTApYv6c7gFKY3CQ3EBNw0d4EZ1T7Gt9uvIYY9vN+ > UznY5QrBC1vDFNB2J3/SQPcQlCkIXE51A28S2BRhxDYFmtSjq2uSCThCuHjCVxaH > SHeMO2AkUYRMZuH5znhYynw1FZATJxVmesjrYaMP4zhD/tXNK2aAZi3ARQ1kXPE= > =oR9y > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >