5 ms·
Headline is a little misleading. She had nothing to do with the release of the Panama Papers. She read them once they were posted online, looking to see if ther
by lawnchair_larry 9y ago
Headline is a little misleading. She had nothing to do with the release of the Panama Papers. She read them once they were posted online, looking to see if there were people of interest to her community, and blogging about that.
- kafkaesq 9y agoI didn't read the headline (perhaps it has mutated since) as indicating that she was involved in the release of the Panama Papers, per say - just that she was a journalist who wrote about them.
- danso 9y agoShe's a journalist whose reporting on the Panama Papers led to significant impact in Malta: http://www.politico.eu/list/politico-28-class-of-2017-ranking/daphne-caruana-galizia/ http://www.politico.eu/list/politico-28-class-of-2017-rankin... > The best way to think of Daphne Caruana Galizia is as a one-woman WikiLeaks, crusading against untransparency and corruption in Malta, an island nation famous for both...“She single-handedly brought the government to the verge of collapse,” says one MP.* If it were straightforward to report on Malta in the Panama Papers, the original investigation would have targeted Malta's government. A lot of important journalism is examining released material and connecting the dots within a context.
- lawnchair_larry 9y agoSure, I was not saying anything one way or another about her impact. The headline just made it sound like it was the person who broke the Panama Papers story. Or maybe it was just me who read it that way.