4 ms·

Unfortunately being doxxed by Reddit (funny how Reddit is known for that these days) isn't a requirement for having some nutcases go off on you: http://www.nyp

Unfortunately being doxxed by Reddit (funny how Reddit is known for that these days) isn't a requirement for having some nutcases go off on you: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bronx/bx_idiots_beat_up_arab_in_revenge_76qKozmZwDUpLUbacqqP3O http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bronx/bx_idiots_beat_up_a... Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources driving up the hysteria and publishing these photos.

rhizome 14y ago
Where are you getting irony out of the Post's editorial policy?
lucisferre 14y ago
I'd argue being doxxed means some nutcases already did go off on you.
jpdoctor 14y ago
> Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources Just as the WSJ published about people in custody, the lesson is clear: Do not bother listening to any Rupert Murdock publication for news. The WSJ should just stick to finance, and the NYP should stick to whatever it is that it does well. (Remind me: What was it that the NYP does well?)
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- e40 14y ago
  the lesson is clear: Do not bother listening to any Rupert Murdock publication for news. Amen. Everyone, just refuse to follow a link to a Murdock website. Daily Mail. NY Post. WSJ. Are there others?
  - cypherpunks01 14y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_News_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_News_C...
  - brewdad 14y ago
    Murdoch Block extension for Chrome works well. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/murdoch-block/moepiacmhnmbiilhpojodnaopndhddpg?utm_source=chrome-ntp-icon https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/murdoch-block/moep...
  - desas 14y ago
    The daily mail is worth ignoring, it is nothing to do with Rupert Murdoch though - it is mainly owned by Viscount Rothermere
ep103 14y ago
Not ironically, the NY Post is just as bad as the Daily Mail. On the day of the bombing, they were reporting that the bomber had already been arrested. The day after the bombing, they had a picture on their cover of a backpack that was supposedly the bomb... except it wasn't. Today, they had a picture of two middle eastern looking people, who had nothing to do with the bombing. This is par the course for the NY Post. My favorite though, is when I used to do political work, the NY Post would show up to large events, set up a quick photoshoot with paid actors, then leave, and whatever they staged a picture of would be the next day's front page. Fuck the post.
- pkfrank 14y ago
  Is there no penalty available for flagrantly inaccurate and damaging reporting?
  - rahoulb 14y ago
    Well, in the UK you can complain to the Press Complaints Commission. Headed by the editor of the Daily Mail
  - lostlogin 14y ago
    Steep profits which encourage further moral decline?
- beedogs 14y ago
  I honestly think all of Rupert Murdoch's newspapers and TV outlets should be taken away from him and destroyed.
rbanffy 14y ago
> Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources driving up the hysteria They optimize for units sold, not precise reporting.
silverbax88 14y ago
In cases such as this, I can't help but wonder if the person in the picture has a strong legal case of libel and defamation against the publisher. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, and maybe it's just my personality but if a newspaper tried to ruin my life just to sell newspapers, I'd 'lawyer up' with the intent of owning that newspaper when it was all said and done.

rhizome 14y ago

Where are you getting irony out of the Post's editorial policy?

lucisferre 14y ago

I'd argue being doxxed means some nutcases already did go off on you.

jpdoctor 14y ago

> Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources Just as the WSJ published about people in custody, the lesson is clear: Do not bother listening to any Rupert Murdock publication for news. The WSJ should just stick to finance, and the NYP should stick to whatever it is that it does well. (Remind me: What was it that the NYP does well?)

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
e40 14y ago
the lesson is clear: Do not bother listening to any Rupert Murdock publication for news. Amen. Everyone, just refuse to follow a link to a Murdock website. Daily Mail. NY Post. WSJ. Are there others?
- cypherpunks01 14y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_News_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_News_C...
- brewdad 14y ago
  Murdoch Block extension for Chrome works well. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/murdoch-block/moepiacmhnmbiilhpojodnaopndhddpg?utm_source=chrome-ntp-icon https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/murdoch-block/moep...
- desas 14y ago
  The daily mail is worth ignoring, it is nothing to do with Rupert Murdoch though - it is mainly owned by Viscount Rothermere

ep103 14y ago

Not ironically, the NY Post is just as bad as the Daily Mail. On the day of the bombing, they were reporting that the bomber had already been arrested. The day after the bombing, they had a picture on their cover of a backpack that was supposedly the bomb... except it wasn't. Today, they had a picture of two middle eastern looking people, who had nothing to do with the bombing. This is par the course for the NY Post. My favorite though, is when I used to do political work, the NY Post would show up to large events, set up a quick photoshoot with paid actors, then leave, and whatever they staged a picture of would be the next day's front page. Fuck the post.

pkfrank 14y ago
Is there no penalty available for flagrantly inaccurate and damaging reporting?
- rahoulb 14y ago
  Well, in the UK you can complain to the Press Complaints Commission. Headed by the editor of the Daily Mail
- lostlogin 14y ago
  Steep profits which encourage further moral decline?
beedogs 14y ago
I honestly think all of Rupert Murdoch's newspapers and TV outlets should be taken away from him and destroyed.

rbanffy 14y ago

> Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources driving up the hysteria They optimize for units sold, not precise reporting.

silverbax88 14y ago

In cases such as this, I can't help but wonder if the person in the picture has a strong legal case of libel and defamation against the publisher. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, and maybe it's just my personality but if a newspaper tried to ruin my life just to sell newspapers, I'd 'lawyer up' with the intent of owning that newspaper when it was all said and done.