3 ms·
It's because he was, effectively if not literally, an American journalist. It's well known among journalists, and there's even a sort of exponent-based 'law' th
by forapurpose 8y ago
It's because he was, effectively if not literally, an American journalist. It's well known among journalists, and there's even a sort of exponent-based 'law' that's sarcastically cited - I can't remember it, but it's something like: 1 person killed on your block is equivalent to 10 people killed 100 miles away, etc.
An American killed means much more to Americans than 100 people from Saudi Arabia killed, and vice versa.
- mc32 8y agoHe was Saudi, hence his visit to the embassy to get some marriage license thing done. It’s like saying an American correspondent stationed in Iran is actually an Iranian. Even if he had been, say, what’s that conspiracy theorist-cum-journalist, Jones. If he’d bern offed as an American, I’m unsure of yhd media reaction. Of course, you might come and retort hd wasn’t a “true journalist”. But then we’re picking anc choosing fights.
- forapurpose 8y ago> He was Saudi To be clear, I wasn't talking about his legal status. I'm talking about how the conception of him in the minds of many Americans: A journalist for the Washington Post is an American journalist, to a great degree, in many Americans minds. If he worked for the Jerusalem Post or a prominent Saudi news organization, IMHO Americans would have much less interest. Many Al Jazeera journalists have experienced pretty bad treatment, but I doubt most people know. The rest of the parent comment is a made-up situation.