3 ms·
So this is rather meta but I'm unsure how to address this sort of systemic issue. There is currently another topic under discussion that is very local to Arizo
by AStonesThrow 1y ago
So this is rather meta but I'm unsure how to address this sort of systemic issue.
There is currently another topic under discussion that is very local to Arizona, involving a court case there, yet the conversation has coalesced around a thread from theguardian.com, which is a UK news outlet.
Why are we letting foreign entities tell us what our local news is? This here article is ostensibly about travel within the U.S., from one state to another, because that's the major change with Real ID, yet again we're looking at a foreign entity's news article about it.
Why can't we use news articles that are most germane to the topic under discussion? The "AZ Road Rage" topic had someone posting a perfectly good link to ABC 15 News, which should be a local authority on the topic; I don't see why we needed to pivot outside the U.S. to The Guardian at all.
- ccakes 1y agoI guess this is the result of the free market at work. A link to multiple articles was posted but the consumers (HN users) voted with their wallets (upvotes) and here we are Is it not the system working as designed?
- crazygringo 1y agoYou seem to be making the assumption that local reporting is better in some way; i.e. that it will be more accurate? You might be interested to know that the UK publication The Economist tries to have non-UK reporters covering the UK, and non-US reporters covering the US. The idea being that non-local reporters are both more neutral and have a wider perspective to bring. The Guardian is one of the world's top newspapers, along with the New York Times, Le Monde, etc. HN is international. And honestly I'll take reporting from The Guardian over a local ABC 15 affiliate any day. This is a national story. A random local affiliate has less resources to report the story, not more.