5 ms·
I call bullshit. First of all, the Fallacy of Relative Privation most definitely applies. (LMGTFY: "not as bad as" is fallacious.) But, far more importantly,
by rosser 10y ago
I call bullshit.
First of all, the Fallacy of Relative Privation most definitely applies. (LMGTFY: "not as bad as" is fallacious.)
But, far more importantly, this isn't about how "hard" or "dangerous" it is for her. It's about the deep threat to a Free Press that this prosecution represents.
- abalone 10y agoThat's kind of an unnecessarily rude and condescending reply. The funny thing is, in your rush to showcase your command of logical fallacies you perpetrated a straw man fallacy. I merely said she is brave, worthy of our deep respect and likely to persevere in the face of adversity, not that we shouldn't be deeply concerned about this case.
- Theizestooke 10y agoOk maybe clarify what you mean by "She can handle this one".
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ratsmack 10y agoI have to wonder if one of the big networks, CNN, NBC or ABC were there reporting, would the same thing be applied to their journalists?
- Drdrdrq 10y agoIn a sense - yes, that is why they weren't reporting.
- mac01021 10y agoThis only leaves me with more questions. How do the reporters from the larger networks know that this kind of reporting is off-limits? Is it common sense? And, if so, does that suggest Ms. Goodman was in the wrong here? Were they told by the pipeline developers? Wouldn't that threat/restriction in itself be worth some amount of reporting? Would that be wise for the developers to do? Might not such behavior merely further attract the interest of journalists with the legal resources to combat the charges?
- git_rancher 10y ago> How do the reporters from the larger networks know that this kind of reporting is off-limits I think part of it is explainable by the economic incentive to not upset corporations that the network depends on for ad revenue.
- abalone 10y agoA very good analysis of these very questions is Manufacturing Consent by Chomsky and Herman.[1] It is fairly scientific, supported by case studies of mainstream coverage of roughly similar atrocities committed by U.S. allies or the U.S. itself, and official U.S. enemies. In fact it reviews the very case of East Timor. It compares the near total silence of coverage of that (Indonesia's brutal dictator was an ally) to the coverage of the Communist Khmer Rouge atrocities in Cambodia, which was extensive and impassioned. They discuss a few simple mechanisms that help explain how this bias happens in our otherwise democratic society, which they call the Propaganda Model.[2] A key factor is that major media is funded by advertising, which imparts a kind of natural selection for viewpoints that favor the class interests of the business elite (which extends to foreign policy that favors a powerful American state). So by the time you get hired as a reporter for major media, you've already been selected. You don't have to be told to do the right thing, because you already believe what you're doing to be right. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499 https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Econo... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model
- 1iota 10y agoDoes the Council on Foreign Relations play a role in "selecting" the journalists?
- hdiwan 10y agoReporters from larger networks have their higherups "filter" their assignments for them. Ms Goodman doesn't appear to have any higher-ups.