4 ms·
No, they are placing an urgency on it now that a candidate they do not approve of will be assuming power. If Hillary had won I seriously doubt you would see one
by Shivetya 10y ago
No, they are placing an urgency on it now that a candidate they do not approve of will be assuming power. If Hillary had won I seriously doubt you would see one article about it except from sources derided as right wing.
So the NY Times went after it under Bush, maybe this country just needs Republican Administrations just so the press will do their damn job. They certainly got silent for most of eight years.
- hga 10y agomaybe this country just needs Republican Administrations just so the press will do their damn job Many people have been making the point that for this reason, for the foreseeable future the Presidency must be limited to white male Republicans ^_^. Seriously, for more than a generation pretty much all capital and lower case 'c' constitutional checks and balances utterly fail if that's not the case.
- hackuser 10y ago> So the NY Times went after it under Bush ... They certainly got silent for most of eight years. The evidence does not bear this out. The NY Times also 'went after it' under Obama, publishing Snowden's and Manning's leaks for example. They also broke the story on Clinton's email server, which probably cost her the election eventually.
- grzm 10y agoIf I were more ambitious, I'd love to see meta-analyses investigating questions like this. Given the tools we now have available, it's likely more a question of figuring out how to design the experiments. Might even be useful for the organizations themselves. I'm not so naive as to think anyone is free of bias. Best we can do is be aware of them and build processes that guard against our biases from negatively influencing our desired goals. This might be one tool in that tool box.