5 ms·

Is it shoddy for a newspaper article to spell out some particular consequences of a general policy?

no_wizard 3y ago
No, but the intention of the headline is definitely a grabber, and I think many (myself included) would prefer more neutral toned headlines, or maybe ones that word it so its more clear that its highlighting in part whats happening, IE: Sheriff Shares License Plate With Other States, Includes Abortion Related Travel May be more fair while still raising the issue
- moate 3y ago
  The irony being that sharing with more states is WORSE but because the (true) headline is tied to a specific hot button issue you find it bad?
- InSteady 3y ago
  In some people's view, this is not an issue to pussyfoot around over. The states trying to criminalize personal healthcare decisions certainly aren't. What a dystopian nightmare it would be to be a single mother barely above the poverty line and somehow get time off work and scrape together the cash for a trip several states away to get an abortion, only to wind up in prison for 10 years because mass data collection and dissemination is standard procedure for law enforcement and no one thought to protect the rights and privacy of pregnant women from out of state. It's actually sickening to think about. But yea let's talk more about how they should have written the headline to suit our sensibilities.
  - no_wizard 3y ago
    I think its valid to think about both, I'm not slamming the SacBee for good content here, was simply speaking to their history of headline stuff. I was a subscriber when I lived there, I think they do great reporting. They're 100% right to raise this issue. I also think their headlines are overly tailored to "turn heads", so to speak.
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    > trying to criminalize personal healthcare decisions Another one of those technically correct but not accurate statements and perhaps the root of the misunderstanding here. You could also frame it as "prevent the mass murder of children". A headline about this data in another state may say "local police collaborate with murderers" with the same level of accuracy.
    - InSteady 3y ago
      >You could also frame it as "prevent the mass murder of children". You could if your notions of the world are informed by superstitions and ancient dogma rather than science. >A headline about this data in another state may say "local police collaborate with murderers" with the same level of accuracy. You've lost the plot.
    - xenospn 3y ago
      You absolutely could not frame it as "prevent mass murder of children" since there is no murder and no children involved.
- evan_ 3y ago
  > more neutral toned headlines New York Times headline on September 12, 2001: 274 Skyscrapers Not Attacked
- slg 3y ago
  Why is everyone blaming the headline, newspaper, and media for connecting this surveillance issue to abortion? The EFF is the one who framed this issue in the context of abortion. The article's headline and reporting are a response to the EFF's actions.
  - no_wizard 3y ago
    I think its fine for the EFF to frame it this way. Its that the headline has a very clickbait-ish feel, its a "head turner" type headline
- yellowapple 3y ago
  It needs to be a grabber in order to remind people of specific reasons why general policies like this might be bad. A lot of people operate under the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" principle; the point of articles like this is to remind folks that yes, you might very well have something to hide, and you shouldn't trust the police to keep it hidden.
goodbyesf 3y ago
It is shoddy because it clearly shows an agenda and bias. It's why many people now view companies like sacbee as advocacy groups rather than news organization.
- moate 3y ago
  There is no neutral reporting. The act of deciding to publish something on page one is an inherent choice NOT to publish other things there. The facts are there, show me the lie in this article (vs the “choice of what to highlight”) which is the only thing that could make it shoddy. Media both creates and reflects people’s attention and anyone pretending it’s only one or the other is showing their own bias.
  - goodbyesf 3y ago
    > There is no neutral reporting. I agree. That was my point. But point this truth out to people who work at sacbee and they'll proclaim they are objective beacons of truth. > Media both creates and reflects people’s attention and anyone pretending it’s only one or the other is showing their own bias. The media pretends it's only one or the other. That's the point.
- evan_ 3y ago
  It's just Man Bites Dog in action. If states shared data about a murder or something that everyone agrees should be prosecuted, it wouldn't be interesting. Nobody cares about that, because we all agree that if you drive to another state to shoot someone, you should be prosecuted for that. The fact that a Sheriff is sharing data that could be used for a controversial prosecution is interesting and worthy of reporting on.
  - chrismcb 3y ago
    Law enforcement agencies shouldn't be sharing licence part reader info with ANYONE, at least without a warrant. For murder or not. Now it sounds like they are sharing all the data for everyone, which is different than sharing the data in a specific person. I would also be interested in how a state will prosecute someone for doing something legal.
chrismcb 3y ago
It is when it is a made up bogeyman. I would love to see how a state will prosecute someone for doing something legal in another state. It isn't going to happen. So no reason for this paper to bring it up. The real issue is sharing this data with ANYONE, not just out of state.

No, but the intention of the headline is definitely a grabber, and I think many (myself included) would prefer more neutral toned headlines, or maybe ones that word it so its more clear that its highlighting in part whats happening, IE: Sheriff Shares License Plate With Other States, Includes Abortion Related Travel May be more fair while still raising the issue

moate 3y ago
The irony being that sharing with more states is WORSE but because the (true) headline is tied to a specific hot button issue you find it bad?
InSteady 3y ago
In some people's view, this is not an issue to pussyfoot around over. The states trying to criminalize personal healthcare decisions certainly aren't. What a dystopian nightmare it would be to be a single mother barely above the poverty line and somehow get time off work and scrape together the cash for a trip several states away to get an abortion, only to wind up in prison for 10 years because mass data collection and dissemination is standard procedure for law enforcement and no one thought to protect the rights and privacy of pregnant women from out of state. It's actually sickening to think about. But yea let's talk more about how they should have written the headline to suit our sensibilities.
- no_wizard 3y ago
  I think its valid to think about both, I'm not slamming the SacBee for good content here, was simply speaking to their history of headline stuff. I was a subscriber when I lived there, I think they do great reporting. They're 100% right to raise this issue. I also think their headlines are overly tailored to "turn heads", so to speak.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  > trying to criminalize personal healthcare decisions Another one of those technically correct but not accurate statements and perhaps the root of the misunderstanding here. You could also frame it as "prevent the mass murder of children". A headline about this data in another state may say "local police collaborate with murderers" with the same level of accuracy.
  - InSteady 3y ago
    >You could also frame it as "prevent the mass murder of children". You could if your notions of the world are informed by superstitions and ancient dogma rather than science. >A headline about this data in another state may say "local police collaborate with murderers" with the same level of accuracy. You've lost the plot.
  - xenospn 3y ago
    You absolutely could not frame it as "prevent mass murder of children" since there is no murder and no children involved.
evan_ 3y ago
> more neutral toned headlines New York Times headline on September 12, 2001: 274 Skyscrapers Not Attacked
slg 3y ago
Why is everyone blaming the headline, newspaper, and media for connecting this surveillance issue to abortion? The EFF is the one who framed this issue in the context of abortion. The article's headline and reporting are a response to the EFF's actions.
- no_wizard 3y ago
  I think its fine for the EFF to frame it this way. Its that the headline has a very clickbait-ish feel, its a "head turner" type headline
yellowapple 3y ago
It needs to be a grabber in order to remind people of specific reasons why general policies like this might be bad. A lot of people operate under the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" principle; the point of articles like this is to remind folks that yes, you might very well have something to hide, and you shouldn't trust the police to keep it hidden.

goodbyesf 3y ago

It is shoddy because it clearly shows an agenda and bias. It's why many people now view companies like sacbee as advocacy groups rather than news organization.

moate 3y ago
There is no neutral reporting. The act of deciding to publish something on page one is an inherent choice NOT to publish other things there. The facts are there, show me the lie in this article (vs the “choice of what to highlight”) which is the only thing that could make it shoddy. Media both creates and reflects people’s attention and anyone pretending it’s only one or the other is showing their own bias.
- goodbyesf 3y ago
  > There is no neutral reporting. I agree. That was my point. But point this truth out to people who work at sacbee and they'll proclaim they are objective beacons of truth. > Media both creates and reflects people’s attention and anyone pretending it’s only one or the other is showing their own bias. The media pretends it's only one or the other. That's the point.
evan_ 3y ago
It's just Man Bites Dog in action. If states shared data about a murder or something that everyone agrees should be prosecuted, it wouldn't be interesting. Nobody cares about that, because we all agree that if you drive to another state to shoot someone, you should be prosecuted for that. The fact that a Sheriff is sharing data that could be used for a controversial prosecution is interesting and worthy of reporting on.
- chrismcb 3y ago
  Law enforcement agencies shouldn't be sharing licence part reader info with ANYONE, at least without a warrant. For murder or not. Now it sounds like they are sharing all the data for everyone, which is different than sharing the data in a specific person. I would also be interested in how a state will prosecute someone for doing something legal.

chrismcb 3y ago

It is when it is a made up bogeyman. I would love to see how a state will prosecute someone for doing something legal in another state. It isn't going to happen. So no reason for this paper to bring it up. The real issue is sharing this data with ANYONE, not just out of state.