3 ms·
Kind of works out to special freedoms when the govt limits the number of people who can observe events and hands access credentials out based on whether they ar
by unishark 5y ago
Kind of works out to special freedoms when the govt limits the number of people who can observe events and hands access credentials out based on whether they are more legitimate-appearing journalists.
- chrisseaton 5y agoWhy does the government have an approved press pool? When you think about it it’s completely barmy. Why don’t they do everything via press releases and let everyone access equally?
- Retric 5y agoIt’s a legacy from before radio, which sticks around because press briefings often allow for questions. Q&A is useful because it adds clarity, but the format means they can pick which reporters to favor.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> Why don’t they do everything via press releases and let everyone access equally? Because that's less transparent. From an idealistic perspective, sure, this is fine. From a practical perspective, it's bonkers.
- chrisseaton 5y agoWhy is it more transparent to let a lot of unelected people who represent nobody ask questions? We already have elected people paid to do this job - HM’s opposition.
- JumpCrisscross 5y agoThis is a good example of letting perfect be the enemy of the good. Because everyone can't--physically--have access, nobody gets it and the elected leadership gets to hide behind press releases.
- chrisseaton 5y agoThe Opposition get it - that’s what they’re there for. And unlike the press they’re elected, paid, accountable, and recallable.