3 ms·
Okay I admit to skimming after the tenth paragraph or so, so if I screw up my response I apologize. The article just seemed very wordy, but not so substantive.
by DanielBMarkham 16y ago
Okay I admit to skimming after the tenth paragraph or so, so if I screw up my response I apologize. The article just seemed very wordy, but not so substantive.
<snark>But am I to understand that the beef here is that wired is _not_ publishing something that others think they should? So now not only do we need a world with no secrets, we also need a world where the mob can demand that others publish whatever we ask?
I know the counter-response will be something like "but they made statements for which we have no support and the chat logs could either prove or refute those statements"
To that response, all I have to offer is that there is an active criminal investigation, not carried out in the press or the mob but by due process, and that news sources all the time say things from anonymous sources and such. I don't like it when they do, but I don't think demanding that every news source that uses an anonymous source release their name is very realistic either.
I understand that this is an emotionally-charged issue. And folks want to know. But you can rest assured that it will all eventually come out. If that's not fast enough for you, then perhaps a little more patience might help.
This whole thing -- the subsequent events to WL and Manning's arrest, including the title of the article here, has the air of a bunch of assholes kicking around folks just to keep their emotions stirred up and readership levels high. It's become the chatty, gossipy topic-of-the-week. If you can't find a juicy enough Wikileaks story, then run a story about the story that doesn't exist. What did they say about cable news during the Monica Lewinsky scandal? It's all Monica, all the time. Wikileaks makes folks crazy, and I have a feeling various news outlets are going to be yanking our chain with this for some time to come. There's money in it, no matter what angle you use.</snark>
Feel free to correct me if I've missed something.
- rhizome 16y agoAs far as I know, Wired is not operating under a gag order and they are not a party to the case. It is not illegal or anything to evaluate independently-possessed evidence.