Re:The Intercept cuts back
by bdefore on Sunday March 17, 2019 @06:54AM
(#19413361)
Making an ad hominem attack on one reporter who said something sarcy and twitterlike on Twitter (not in an article) five years ago, while employed at a different company, should hardly determine whether you care about The Intercept. His output for them is here if you care to identify how is 'hatred and social anxiety' is affecting his work: https://theintercept.com/staff/sambiddle/
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Intercept cuts back
by closeparen on Tuesday March 19, 2019 @10:23PM
(#19438325)
Of course it doesn’t.
His output is “look at all these villains in technology, and cheer on all these heroes who are coming to kick their asses,” exactly in line with his stated mission.
Look, organizing and agitating against the tech community is valid work, but it’s distinct from journalism. For that I look to EFF, which has clearly disclosed set of principles to be activist about, and goes after anyone and everyone in defense of those principles. Often tech companies, but also everyone else.
Not the same thing as choosing an enemy, looking for anything and everything you can use against it, and calling it journalism.
Re:The Intercept cuts back
by reitzensteinm on Sunday March 17, 2019 @07:39AM
(#19413481)
Sarcy and Twitterlike isn't some kind of a defense. People that are assholes on Twitter are in fact assholes.
Re:The Intercept cuts back
by jessaustin on Sunday March 17, 2019 @12:18PM
(#19414749)
We're all assholes to some extent, but Twitter accentuates that aspect of many personalities. It seems fine-tuned to generate heat with no light. Many people have withdrawn from public life entirely because Twitter could never be arsed to implement decent blocking mechanisms.