3 ms·
> this is according to Politico and NYT's inside sources who are not authorized to speak publicly that's the problem : it's hearsay presented as fact in the ti
by jjtheblunt 2y ago
> this is according to Politico and NYT's inside sources who are not authorized to speak publicly
that's the problem : it's hearsay presented as fact in the title.
- kube-system 2y agoI disagree, I think multiple inside sources is plenty enough evidence to say that an organization is “eyeing” something. It's not a very substantial claim.
- jjtheblunt 2y agoI see what you mean. It made me just realize something interesting though and that’s what happens to these news sources the papers the news outlets when there’s no news on any given day or if there’s really no news for a given week, then what do they publish?
- kube-system 2y agoThere's no such thing. There's 8 billion people on Earth, there's always something going on. The difficulty that news outlets have isn't finding stuff going on, it's narrowing down that list to the most important things. The news is such a tiny snapshot of the important things going on in the world. Take a look at this list, for instance -- how many of these have you seen mentioned in the news recently? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflict... You could easily fill an entire newspaper just with stories about those conflicts. Then there's the entire rest of the world who isn't actively fighting wars. They're doing art, science, medicine, business, politics, sport, etc... every day. There are on average 2,000 thunderstorms happening on Earth at any moment. There's no shortage of news.