4 ms·

I disagree with the notion that Julian Assange is a journalist. I don't find the way he goes about his activities to be commendable. I contrast his/Wikileak d

I disagree with the notion that Julian Assange is a journalist. I don't find the way he goes about his activities to be commendable. I contrast his/Wikileak disclosures with the way the Snowden materials were disseminated and reported on as the the boundaries of proper and improper journalism of these subjects.

mduerksen 7y ago
A journalist is a person who collects, writes, or distributes news or other current information to the public. [1] Check. You can argue about whether his style is commendable or not (for codes of conduct see [2]), but that does not change the fact that he is a journalist. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standard...
- wavefunction 7y ago
  I reject your Wikipedia links as authoritative sources on what constitutes a journalist as well as your contention that he's doing anything other than dumping documents (selectively).
  - mduerksen 7y ago
    Okay, do you have a better definition? And, of course he does more than dumping documents. For example, he has to come by them (collecting as a journalist does), which is no small feat considering which kind of documents we are taking about. If you're genuinely curious, just take a look at his work [1] to see that it's absolutely not "just dumping documents". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange
  - berbec 7y ago
    If "dumping documents" doesn't qualify as a journalist, should the New York Times return it's Pulitzer for the Pentagon Papers? [1] 1: https://www.pulitzer.org/article/race-publish-pentagon-papers https://www.pulitzer.org/article/race-publish-pentagon-paper... 2: https://www.nytimes.com/1972/05/02/archives/the-times-wins-a-pulitzer-for-the-pentagon-papers-the-times-wins.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/05/02/archives/the-times-wins-a...
    - gmueckl 7y ago
      No, because they read these papers and wrote the story on them. Wikileaks just provided mostly unprocessed data dumps. Explaining the story is a very big part of a journalist's job.
      - behringer 7y ago
        Source?
  - SkyBelow 7y ago
    I reject your rejection. Are you going to provide any alternatives, because if not my rejection overrides yours. I would also point out that outright rejecting something without presenting either an argument or alternative why leads up away from productive discussion.
  - drak0n1c 7y ago
    Every outlet, from the New York Times to Fox News to Slate selectively front-pages certain leaks and stories while de-emphasizing and outright ignoring others. Does that make them not-journalists too?

mduerksen 7y ago

A journalist is a person who collects, writes, or distributes news or other current information to the public. [1] Check. You can argue about whether his style is commendable or not (for codes of conduct see [2]), but that does not change the fact that he is a journalist. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standard...

wavefunction 7y ago
I reject your Wikipedia links as authoritative sources on what constitutes a journalist as well as your contention that he's doing anything other than dumping documents (selectively).
- mduerksen 7y ago
  Okay, do you have a better definition? And, of course he does more than dumping documents. For example, he has to come by them (collecting as a journalist does), which is no small feat considering which kind of documents we are taking about. If you're genuinely curious, just take a look at his work [1] to see that it's absolutely not "just dumping documents". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange
- berbec 7y ago
  If "dumping documents" doesn't qualify as a journalist, should the New York Times return it's Pulitzer for the Pentagon Papers? [1] 1: https://www.pulitzer.org/article/race-publish-pentagon-papers https://www.pulitzer.org/article/race-publish-pentagon-paper... 2: https://www.nytimes.com/1972/05/02/archives/the-times-wins-a-pulitzer-for-the-pentagon-papers-the-times-wins.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/05/02/archives/the-times-wins-a...
  - gmueckl 7y ago
    No, because they read these papers and wrote the story on them. Wikileaks just provided mostly unprocessed data dumps. Explaining the story is a very big part of a journalist's job.
    - behringer 7y ago
      Source?
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  I reject your rejection. Are you going to provide any alternatives, because if not my rejection overrides yours. I would also point out that outright rejecting something without presenting either an argument or alternative why leads up away from productive discussion.
- drak0n1c 7y ago
  Every outlet, from the New York Times to Fox News to Slate selectively front-pages certain leaks and stories while de-emphasizing and outright ignoring others. Does that make them not-journalists too?