4 ms·
That's wrong -- this is standard journalistic ethics. That's a gutter dwelling argument that is bullshit on both-sides. Because it supports the idea that priv
by 001sky 12y ago
That's wrong -- this is standard journalistic ethics.
That's a gutter dwelling argument that is bullshit on both-sides. Because it supports the idea that private citizens should also be free to trash journalists. After all, if they have no ethics, they have no moral high ground to use as a defense against their own tactics.
So you are arguing the point of the Uber-douche.
Nice one.
- DanBC 12y agoThe meeting was not off the record. Don't invite journalists to a meeting and expect them to not report what you say at that meeting. If you need to go off the record you need an agreement with the journalist. You've twisted that to suggest that journalists are the same as an Uber executive digging dirt. The difference is that the journalist publishes under their name, via an editor and publisher, and is prepared to go to jail to protect their source. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8622941 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8622941
- 001sky 12y agoWhere is your source for this? Buzzfeed guy was not an invited guest. His excuse was that, since he was not invited, he was not bound to the terms of the invitation. As someone else has written, if you think you need a (written) contract to enforce ethics, you don't understand the concept of 'ethics'. Contracts are useful because they create legal -- not simply ethical -- obligations. In any event, if you don't appreaciate any of this, we can agree to disagree.