3 ms·
What I want to know is: why would anyone else bother staying given these new rules? If you did agree to the terms you'd be limited to publishing the official s
by ben_w 1y ago
What I want to know is: why would anyone else bother staying given these new rules?
If you did agree to the terms you'd be limited to publishing the official story (and can't talk to anyone for off-the-record stuff), but you get that for free anyway even if you never show up, so why bother with the extra expense of actually going to the Pentagon?
- toyg 1y ago> can't talk to anyone for off-the-record stuff Obviously this rule would apply only to real journalists. Members of the party will get free roam. They will stay. Just another day in the life of a regime.
- burkaman 1y agoThey'll get exclusive interviews, they'll get to be visible on TV asking questions to important people, they'll get invited on trips where they can film in front of a cool background like a military base or something. I think it's worth it for anyone that cares about the aesthetics of journalism more than actually reporting anything of value.
- almostgotcaught 1y agoLol you're making it out like the individual reporters make these calls. If anyone stayed it's because their employer believes there's money to be made in staying. The end.
- Swenrekcah 1y agoThis sentiment is just simply not true. People care about more than money, even people who run companies.
- almostgotcaught 1y agoSo those news agencies made the decisions to stay in the press corps just as a nice treat for those reporters (nice trips etc)? Is that what you're saying?
- Swenrekcah 1y agoClearly I did not say that. I also honestly don’t see the point you are trying to make, can you clarify?
- almostgotcaught 1y agoCan you first clarify what point you're trying to make in the context of these news agencies staying or going? Edit: the equivocation about people not being cynical always in their roles in a corporation (a very trite claim to begin with) is extra funny in the context of the literal laws that bind employees of corporations to do exactly what we all already know they are bound to do: > They must discharge their actions in good faith and in the best interest of the corporation, exercising the care an ordinary person would use under similar circumstances. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care_(business_associations) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care_(business_associa... You can be quite literally sued into oblivion for not being cynical in your roles and responsibilities as an employee of a C corp.
- Swenrekcah 1y agoWell I don’t live in the US, maybe there are only cynical people there. Somehow I doubt that though. Also remember that “best interests of the corporation” doesn’t necessarily mean get money now and lose reputation for a long time. Some people might interpret it that way, others not. It is all context dependent and there is no guarantee people would be convinced for taking the long view if they can provide justification.
- almostgotcaught 1y agoMy guy you're moving the goal posts so far back you're about to fall off the end of the earth
- Swenrekcah 1y agoOk guy.
- egorfine 1y ago> why would anyone else bother staying given these new rules? Imagine being an aspiring blogger/independent journalist. One can only dream of such a possibility as to join the press corp of Pentagon. Of course many will agree to all restrictions and rules for the opportunity.
- general1465 1y agoThen how are you different than the "press release" page on Pentagon website?
- egorfine 1y agoYou don't get access to networking and opportunities by reposting press releases from the warmth of your basement.
- general1465 1y agoOk, but you can't publish anything from such networking otherwise you will lose your pass. So what's the point?
- immibis 1y agoIf you do a good enough job publishing the official government narrative, you might get promoted to cabinet member. Half this cabinet are former teenage youtubers who did a good enough job supporting the regime's first term.
- general1465 1y agoAs somebody from former Eastern Block, getting promoted by your own party often times meant that you will be also first to end up in gulag/labor camp/prison as a scape goat when dear leader made wrong decision because you have provided him misleading information. So many communists ended up imprisoned by other communists because they weren't pure enough or because scape goat was needed.
- liampulles 1y agoHey I embrace remote working too, but not everyone views it that way
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> why would anyone else bother staying given these new rules? The ones who stay are influencers. Not journalists. Their viewers (almost certainly not readers) don’t know the difference.
- ben_w 1y agoI can buy that. But even then, I've seen plenty of videos where one person is just commenting on another video, so even for those influencers… they can do it without actually showing up. Edit: I suspect you're right anyway. Typical mind fallacy on my part, as there have been people giving anecdotal stories of DOGE recruiters offering them a pay cut relative to their current roles just for the chance to do that work and get DOGE on their CVs, recruiters very confused that the response was that DOGE would be seen as a negative by future employers.
- refurb 1y agoThat's not true. It's an agreement not to publish classified information that has been leaked to the media. Nothing stops them from publishing criticisms of the administrations talking points, or conversations that happen outside of press conferences.
- cosmicgadget 1y ago“Information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if it is unclassified,”
- refurb 1y agoThanks for sharing the exact language. So it's purely leaks. Seems like the wrong way about it. If your own people are leaking information, you should fix that, not force the press not to report on it.
- belorn 1y agoThey get to publishing official "leaks" and the ability to ask additional questions that allow the story to be tailored towards their readers.
- projectazorian 1y ago> What I want to know is: why would anyone else bother staying given these new rules? Being a toady often has career benefits - and at least on the right it's often lucrative to boot. I mean, look at how Hegseth got his job.
- cosmicgadget 1y agoThere's no right answer. Stay and you can only publish the approved messaging except maybe once. Go and you give them a shroud of secrecy.
- rsynnott 1y agoIt seems like basically the only ones who stayed are OAN; in their case it's probably just a demonstration of loyalty to Dear Leader. As you say, being there under those rules seems otherwise rather pointless.