4 ms·
The headline is a bit sensationalistic, if arguably accurate. Edit for the downvoters: before it was modified, the headline read something to the effect of "US
by redthrowaway 15y ago
The headline is a bit sensationalistic, if arguably accurate.
Edit for the downvoters: before it was modified, the headline read something to the effect of "US Government invades jacob Applebaum's privacy in continuing Wikileaks witch hunt".
- safeaim 15y agoWhat's untrue about that older headline? Isn't that exactly what's happening right now?
- redthrowaway 15y agoI'm always suspicious of people who put conveying their emotional reaction to a story above getting the facts across. You see it on reddit all the time, and submitters hide behind the very justification you just gave. In the end, it lowers overall quality. Good journalism is about more than simply truth. It's about professionalism and the appearance of such. Similarly, on HN I don't want to be browbeaten by people's moral judgements on any given issue. Give me the facts and I'll make my own judgements. I happen to agree that the USG's actions against Wikileaks supporters are, if not extralegal, then certainly not in keeping with the ideals the US justice system is based on. That does not, however, mean that having headlines like that improves my experience on HN.