4 ms·
This is the opposite of dangerous. This is, dare I say, good reporting. Twitter had a very public technical glitch and the next day the head of engineering resi
by Dudelander 3y ago
This is the opposite of dangerous. This is, dare I say, good reporting. Twitter had a very public technical glitch and the next day the head of engineering resigns, there is an obvious connection that can be drawn. If news outlets don't make obvious connections, governments and business are allowed to frame things however they want.
Journalists are not courts, they do not and should not have to have a policy of "innocent until proven guilty". They should aspire to narratives that are based on a preponderance of evidence.
- senttoschool 3y agoWhat if it comes out that this guy left because he was battling health issues or he just found a better paying job? But that vast majority of people have already made the association through this article.
- Dudelander 3y agoBut then what if his Twitter account was hacked and he really didn't resign? You can speculate all you want, but journalists need to base their reporting on facts.
- senttoschool 3y agoNow that the facts have come out. Dabiri said him leaving didn't have to do with the Desantis event. Now what? Is the BBC going to retract the article? Add notes to the original article saying there was no connection? Track down every one who read it and tell them there was no connection? This is how misinformation and dangerous narratives get built slowly.
- Dudelander 3y agoGood journalism is not taking powerful peoples' word for things when there is considerable evidence to the contrary. If you want to believe Dabiri that's fine, but nothing in the article was factually incorrect and there is still a strong likelihood that the event was linked to his resignation.