3 ms·
> Breaking trust, going against wished how people prefer to be addressed and endangering people for now good reason - well, it's at most style of irresponsible,
by catacombs 6y ago
> Breaking trust, going against wished how people prefer to be addressed and endangering people for now good reason - well, it's at most style of irresponsible, tabloid-level journalism.
Did you read SSC's post? SSC didn't mention anything of a "promise" or "agreement" for the reporter to not use his name. The reporter found it another way.
Now, if SSC explicitly said the reporter promised not to use his name, then that opens a new can of worms.
- stared 6y agoDoxxing is not something new. Scott Alexander is clear about his anonymity. If a journalist interviewed a popular camgirl who introduced herself as (say) LustyClaraXXX, and then "did research" to compare pictures, and revealed her legal name an occupation (say, a schoolteacher), would you consider it ethical? If yes, why so? If no, why so?
- catacombs 6y ago> If a journalist interviewed a popular camgirl who introduced herself as (say) LustyClaraXXX, and then "did research" to compare pictures, and revealed her legal name an occupation (say, a schoolteacher), would you consider it ethical? It really depends on the context of the story, with additional nuances that a competent editor must consider: Is this camgirl the central figure of this story? What are her reasons for not revealing her real name? You say she is a school teacher. What kind of teacher? Is she a well-known professor? Is she someone who teaches kindergarten? Does she make more money from camming than being a teacher? That in itself could be another story about the system. And on and on and on.