NSFW: Don’t bullshit a reformed bullshitter

Re:NSFW: Don’t bullshit a reformed bullshitter by param on Saturday August 08, 2009 @06:37PM (#749933)

1 line summary: Reporter/columnist decides he will not honor the privacy request of 'off-the-record' disclosures if he discovers that the source was lying to him.

However, who determines that the source was lying? If the journo in question thinks he was lying to? This would discourage any insider from talking to him anonymously

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NSFW: Don’t bullshit a reformed bullshitter by tptacek on Saturday August 08, 2009 @07:20PM (#749982)

He's not a reporter/columnist. He works for TechCrunch. Did you seriously think he'd go to jail to protect sources? Look at all the other journalistic ethics they've declared "irrelevant".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NSFW: Don’t bullshit a reformed bullshitter by dsingleton on Saturday August 08, 2009 @07:52PM (#750028)

Although I'm not a huge fan of Paul Carr, he did work for the Guardian, and now for the Telegraph, so I wouldn't judge him by TC association alone.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NSFW: Don’t bullshit a reformed bullshitter by tptacek on Saturday August 08, 2009 @08:36PM (#750084)

I took the word "irrelevant" and its association to actual journalism from his own post.

[ Parent | on HN ]