4 ms·

>WaPo’s coverage of the disappearance of khashoggi was tabloidesque and immature. One of their writers was murdered in a foriegn embassy on foreign soil by the

>WaPo’s coverage of the disappearance of khashoggi was tabloidesque and immature. One of their writers was murdered in a foriegn embassy on foreign soil by the royal family of SA. Tortured and murdered, and dismemembered. That story deserves quite a bit of attention. I'd also like to hear your recommendation on high quailty journalism since WaPo does not meet your standard.

resters 7y ago
There hasn’t been any real information about what happened to the journalist, or about any other entanglements he may have been involved in. There is a good chance KSA wanted him dead, but most in the US do not take seriously the question of whether the US stance toward Saudi is flawed. The US just sold KSA massive amounts of weaponry. The Intercept has solid journalism. The New Yorker does also, some of the time. Journalistic standards have been abandoned by the major news orgs in favor of in group targeted stories that are activism oriented (in the left vs right partisan fray) and not truth seeking. It has been clear for a long time that the WaPo and NYT are playing partisan politics and are cashing in their previously earned journalistic credibility to do so. Both papers wasted the first few years of Trump’s presidency with front page stores about his manners and buffoonery, with no serious investigative work until the story about Trump’s inheritance earlier this year. It’s as if the reporters think their job is to “discover” the blindingly obvious fact that Trump is crass again and again while ignoring the war crimes and bipartisan evil that has been progressing nicely since Trump took office.
- chillwaves 7y ago
  > There hasn’t been any real information about what happened to the journalist You and I live in different realities. There is conclusive evidence as to what happened if you bothered to look. I can only assume you are not speaking in good faith. Re: the rest of your post, AGAIN if you bother to look, there is quite a bit of investigative journalism of substance regarding Trump's misdeeds. Seriously decades of it. I don't know what to say except to try using Google, the information is out there.

resters 7y ago

There hasn’t been any real information about what happened to the journalist, or about any other entanglements he may have been involved in. There is a good chance KSA wanted him dead, but most in the US do not take seriously the question of whether the US stance toward Saudi is flawed. The US just sold KSA massive amounts of weaponry. The Intercept has solid journalism. The New Yorker does also, some of the time. Journalistic standards have been abandoned by the major news orgs in favor of in group targeted stories that are activism oriented (in the left vs right partisan fray) and not truth seeking. It has been clear for a long time that the WaPo and NYT are playing partisan politics and are cashing in their previously earned journalistic credibility to do so. Both papers wasted the first few years of Trump’s presidency with front page stores about his manners and buffoonery, with no serious investigative work until the story about Trump’s inheritance earlier this year. It’s as if the reporters think their job is to “discover” the blindingly obvious fact that Trump is crass again and again while ignoring the war crimes and bipartisan evil that has been progressing nicely since Trump took office.

chillwaves 7y ago
> There hasn’t been any real information about what happened to the journalist You and I live in different realities. There is conclusive evidence as to what happened if you bothered to look. I can only assume you are not speaking in good faith. Re: the rest of your post, AGAIN if you bother to look, there is quite a bit of investigative journalism of substance regarding Trump's misdeeds. Seriously decades of it. I don't know what to say except to try using Google, the information is out there.