5 ms·

Just to nitpick on your logic a little. Your first two statements might be true without the statement that he is a world famous journalist is. Trump is world fa

by Ma8ee 5y ago

Just to nitpick on your logic a little. Your first two statements might be true without the statement that he is a world famous journalist is. Trump is world famous, and he's a golfer. But he's not a world famous golfer, at least not in the usual sense of the word.

harry8 5y ago
Just to nitpick right back at you, if Assange had not published his journalism and its source materials you'd never had heard of him and he would not qualify as famous. So that makes him a world famous journalist. The idea that Trump is famous for playing golf is risible is your point but it does not apply here. There is nothing else that gained Assange fame other than publishing more scoops than any other journalist ever has. by orders of magnitude. Your nitpick is like trying to claim Tiger Woods is world famous for being the victim of domestic violence who also happens to play golf.
- selectodude 5y ago
  Half-assed document dumps aren't journalism. He's a leaker, he didn't put any of the documents in context.
  - harry8 5y ago
    He leaked /nothing/. No really. Absolutely nothing. He published documents leaked by others as supporting evidence for his journalism and to allow other journalists to use the source material. The documents were redacted in partnership with the Guardian, New York Times, Washington Post, El Pais, Le Monde and various others who also linked the source documents. As soon as you have a standard for what doesn't qualify as journalism because you don't like it you have state controlled media. The sheer quantity of lies about what he did or didn't do is really quite mind-boggling - it's so easy to check.
    - nostrebored 5y ago
      Wait, are sources journalists now?
      - harry8 5y ago
        What point about Chelsea Manning are you trying to make? I'm sure she could engage in journalism if she chose. Her and your rights should be protected. Daniel Elsberg does regularly.
- Ma8ee 5y ago
  I knew him as the founder and director of Wikileaks, and that Wikileaks collaborates with a number of publications to get the content of some classified information known to the general public. I didn't know that Julian Assange wrote much himself and in similar fashion worked directly as a journalist. So I'd say that at least one person (me) knew about him without knowing him as a journalist. Your last sentence make it sound like understood the complete opposite of what I said. Anyway, I'm not interested in having a discussion about Julian Assange, where I think we probably are on the same side. I just wanted to make a the small side remark about the fault in the logic.
  - harry8 5y ago
    The reason you heard of Wikileaks and Assange isn't for golf. It is for publishing journalism and in particular journalism containing a vast number of journalistic scoops. So many that it catapulted him to international fame. If you believed wikileaks and Assange were famous for golfing or hacking or leaking or baking pie I have sympathy because the smears on what they did and do have been as relentless as they have been obviously false, (one example that won't go away: "he's a leaker who never actually leaked anything but instead published leaks like the New York Times does which makes him a leaker"). Now you know better. He's a worlds famous journalist and publisher. Without publishing and journalism you don't know him from a bar of soap. Another, separate point worth making. You don't have to like /him/ and support /him/ to support his rights which are also every person engaging in journalisms rights and also /your/ rights. You don't have to hate a government or a nation to oppose when it overreaches. This is a pretty big overreach.
    - nostrebored 5y ago
      I cannot recall a single journalistic work of Julian Assange. All I know is that he facilitated the dumping of US classified documents onto a publicly accessible webpage. Not making a moral judgment about that here, but that is _exclusively_ the way in which I know him.
      - harry8 5y ago

by Ma8ee 5y ago

harry8 5y ago

Just to nitpick right back at you, if Assange had not published his journalism and its source materials you'd never had heard of him and he would not qualify as famous. So that makes him a world famous journalist. The idea that Trump is famous for playing golf is risible is your point but it does not apply here. There is nothing else that gained Assange fame other than publishing more scoops than any other journalist ever has. by orders of magnitude. Your nitpick is like trying to claim Tiger Woods is world famous for being the victim of domestic violence who also happens to play golf.

selectodude 5y ago
Half-assed document dumps aren't journalism. He's a leaker, he didn't put any of the documents in context.
- harry8 5y ago
  He leaked /nothing/. No really. Absolutely nothing. He published documents leaked by others as supporting evidence for his journalism and to allow other journalists to use the source material. The documents were redacted in partnership with the Guardian, New York Times, Washington Post, El Pais, Le Monde and various others who also linked the source documents. As soon as you have a standard for what doesn't qualify as journalism because you don't like it you have state controlled media. The sheer quantity of lies about what he did or didn't do is really quite mind-boggling - it's so easy to check.
  - nostrebored 5y ago
    Wait, are sources journalists now?
    - harry8 5y ago
      What point about Chelsea Manning are you trying to make? I'm sure she could engage in journalism if she chose. Her and your rights should be protected. Daniel Elsberg does regularly.
Ma8ee 5y ago
I knew him as the founder and director of Wikileaks, and that Wikileaks collaborates with a number of publications to get the content of some classified information known to the general public. I didn't know that Julian Assange wrote much himself and in similar fashion worked directly as a journalist. So I'd say that at least one person (me) knew about him without knowing him as a journalist. Your last sentence make it sound like understood the complete opposite of what I said. Anyway, I'm not interested in having a discussion about Julian Assange, where I think we probably are on the same side. I just wanted to make a the small side remark about the fault in the logic.
- harry8 5y ago
  The reason you heard of Wikileaks and Assange isn't for golf. It is for publishing journalism and in particular journalism containing a vast number of journalistic scoops. So many that it catapulted him to international fame. If you believed wikileaks and Assange were famous for golfing or hacking or leaking or baking pie I have sympathy because the smears on what they did and do have been as relentless as they have been obviously false, (one example that won't go away: "he's a leaker who never actually leaked anything but instead published leaks like the New York Times does which makes him a leaker"). Now you know better. He's a worlds famous journalist and publisher. Without publishing and journalism you don't know him from a bar of soap. Another, separate point worth making. You don't have to like /him/ and support /him/ to support his rights which are also every person engaging in journalisms rights and also /your/ rights. You don't have to hate a government or a nation to oppose when it overreaches. This is a pretty big overreach.
  - nostrebored 5y ago
    I cannot recall a single journalistic work of Julian Assange. All I know is that he facilitated the dumping of US classified documents onto a publicly accessible webpage. Not making a moral judgment about that here, but that is _exclusively_ the way in which I know him.
    - harry8 5y ago