3 ms·

Bias is acceptable if you're earning a profit? The "that we all know is bullshit" bit is highly debatable, and doesn't really reflect the reality of news consum

• nickpsecurity 10y ago
  "How does releasing information on one party and not the other invalidate their position as activists? " A consistent series of attacks focusing on the Left while the Right is doing lots of damage makes them activists against the Left specifically. Different than activists for civil rights or honest government/business. " No information on Republicans means WikiLeaks no longer cares about fighting corruption and increasing transparency?" It's odd that we see revelations and reports on both of them consistently from groups like The Guardian and The Intercept but not this activist. "And that they're somehow profit driven because of that too?" He was before that. Constantly fund-raising then charging people for little Assange parties. These days he seems to be driven by ego and/or hate of government. His leaks and reports in the old days were a mix of evil government and business. "Should they have looked for information on all of the detainees at guantanamo when they released the guantanamo files" Now you're just making stuff up. That's nothing like a supposedly neutral organization covering two, known-dirty candidates who are constantly pulling stunts.
  • rfrank 10y ago
    > Different than activists for civil rights or honest government/business. If you perceive the Right or Left to be the greater threat given the information that you have, why do you have any obligation to report on them equally? IE how 75-100% of CNNs front page is anti-Trump stories on any given day. > It's odd that we see revelations and reports on both of them consistently from groups like The Guardian and The Intercept but not this activist. Why? > Constantly fund-raising then charging people for little Assange parties. Fundraising doesn't mean profit. 501c3s also fund raise. As I'm sure you and basically everyone else on this site is aware, running an org that's active in multiple countries over the course of a decade isn't free. > His leaks and reports in the old days were a mix of evil government and business. The current Podesta emails somehow aren't? Have you read them at all? For instance, the stories about Podesta's dealings in Russia [1]. This email [2] includes an attached legal bill regarding formation of Leonidio LLC. Is that not government and business corruption? 1. http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/how-hillarys-campaign-chief-hid-money-from-russia/ http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/how-hillarys-campaign-chief-hid-m... 2. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/13946 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/13946