4 ms·
This is actually one of the side issues I had with the piece. The way it's written, you would think that she asked explicit permission to track him to the hospi
by ameminator 5y ago
This is actually one of the side issues I had with the piece. The way it's written, you would think that she asked explicit permission to track him to the hospital.
However, what seems to have happened in reality, is that they had previously played a harmless game of "find the Airtags". Then, some time later, possibly a large period, she uses those Airtags to track the husband. It's hard to say in either direction if the husband knew and expected to be tracked to the hospital. I think that was a deliberate choice - but it still comes off deceptive, if this is just happenstance.
If any of this had contributed meaningfully to the main points, I would tolerate it a lot more - that's my biggest contention. The fact that the author isnt a perfect person is just a side gripe that I have with plenty other articles.
- wizzwizz4 5y agoI doubt very much that a journalist would publish something about stalking their also works in journalism spouse without everyone involved being on board with what went on. I think it's written to highlight how creepy it is, with the occasional “I got my spouse's consent for all this” interludes to make a point that it's often used for non-consensual spying. Articles don't normally highlight the virtues of the journalist where that's not relevant to the subject of the article.
- outworlder 5y agoThe way I understood that was - she was going to write a piece about this subject. Asked for permission. What's implicit is that this experiment would have to last until she was done writing the piece. Not just "let's find airtags today" and then "boohoo I've been tracking you without permission". Wouldn't make sense. He was not surprised when his phone notified him that a tag was tracking him after a day in Manhattan.