4 ms·
Uh, I just want to point that the sentence you quote gives the reader zero information concerning the substance of the questions being debated. It could be summ
by joe_the_user 3y ago
Uh, I just want to point that the sentence you quote gives the reader zero information concerning the substance of the questions being debated. It could be summarized as "she didn't accept undescribed things that key unnamed people wanted".
Not to put too fine a point on it but the main thing it illustrates is the opaqueness of journalist political commentary, something Debord liken to a "tedious series of lifeless, inconclusive crime novels [having] all the dramatic interest of a realistically staged fight between blacks, at night, in a tunnel." [1]
[1] https://monoskop.org/images/3/3b/Debord_Guy_Comments_on_the_Society_of_the_Spectacle_1990.pdf https://monoskop.org/images/3/3b/Debord_Guy_Comments_on_the_...
- xbar 3y agoWe should demand good journalism. The remainder of this article quotes more than a dozen sources. It seems to rise above pure political commentary by a fair chunk. There is no surprise to me that the chair of a tech privacy panel is opposed to privacy. That seems to be the kind of person that would get such an appointment.