4 ms·

> He wasn't a source, he was a subject. I understand the difference. I'm responding to this line in particular: > doxxing does not exist outside of some parti

> He wasn't a source, he was a subject. I understand the difference. I'm responding to this line in particular: > doxxing does not exist outside of some particular very online spaces Journalists do understand that someone may want to keep their identity secret, which is what doxxing is. While doxxing as a term is particular to the internet, it - at least as a concept - predates the internet.

tablespoon 5y ago
> Journalists do understand that someone may want to keep their identity secret, which is what doxxing is. No, that's not what doxxing is. Journalists understand the need for anonymity in certain contexts, but like I said, it's often part of a bargain for information. It's not about letting people control stories about them. They write stories about events that are embarrassing or damaging to named individuals all the time (e.g. reporting on the police blotter), even though I'm sure all those people would have preferred their identities be kept secret. > While doxxing as a term is particular to the internet, it - at least as a concept - predates the internet. Doxxing is entirely particular to the internet, because IRL people typically use their real names, and almost nobody hides behind pseudonymity.
- dharmaturtle 5y ago
  > They write stories about events that are embarrassing or damaging to named individuals all the time (e.g. reporting on the police blotter), even though I'm sure all those people would have preferred their identities be kept secret. Good point, but notably that info is literally in the public domain. Journalists aren't setting up sting operations to unmask Banksy, and if they did they'd get rightly criticized for it. > Doxxing is entirely particular to the internet, because IRL people typically use their real names, and almost nobody hides behind pseudonymity. You're really, really hung up on the fact that "doxxing" is medium specific, which is why I'm trying to move it to IRL activity. Honestly I think the fact that Metz can't respect the conventions/culture of the medium he's reporting on is another blow against his credability/employability.

tablespoon 5y ago

> Journalists do understand that someone may want to keep their identity secret, which is what doxxing is. No, that's not what doxxing is. Journalists understand the need for anonymity in certain contexts, but like I said, it's often part of a bargain for information. It's not about letting people control stories about them. They write stories about events that are embarrassing or damaging to named individuals all the time (e.g. reporting on the police blotter), even though I'm sure all those people would have preferred their identities be kept secret. > While doxxing as a term is particular to the internet, it - at least as a concept - predates the internet. Doxxing is entirely particular to the internet, because IRL people typically use their real names, and almost nobody hides behind pseudonymity.

dharmaturtle 5y ago
> They write stories about events that are embarrassing or damaging to named individuals all the time (e.g. reporting on the police blotter), even though I'm sure all those people would have preferred their identities be kept secret. Good point, but notably that info is literally in the public domain. Journalists aren't setting up sting operations to unmask Banksy, and if they did they'd get rightly criticized for it. > Doxxing is entirely particular to the internet, because IRL people typically use their real names, and almost nobody hides behind pseudonymity. You're really, really hung up on the fact that "doxxing" is medium specific, which is why I'm trying to move it to IRL activity. Honestly I think the fact that Metz can't respect the conventions/culture of the medium he's reporting on is another blow against his credability/employability.