a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by cgod
cgod  ·  1459 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: And Now we Know his Name

I've followed Jedeed on Twitter for a long time. She gets a lot of respect around town from the socialist and otherwise. She has been working super hard to make our community a better place.

I doubt she or anyone who regularly engages with her work will give a shit if you and other twitter socialist think that she fucked up. I either don't understand most of your comment or I think it's kind of ridiculous and I wonder why you think anyone would give a shit about your shtick.

She's been out there doing real work for a long time. I have found value in that work and I respect her for doing some tough reporting in often dangerous situations.





user-inactivated  ·  1458 days ago  ·  link  ·  
This comment has been deleted.
kleinbl00  ·  1458 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Does this sound like someone who has ever had a genuine fear of where their next meal might be coming from?

Scarcity is not morality.

    But Christ, she went out of her own way to buy a plane ticket to confront what is essentially an angry mob.

When you are saying "she" you are referring to Laura Jedeed? Who you are criticizing for confronting an angry mob? You are... arguing that fascism should flow unchecked? That racism should not be confronted? It is better, after all, to let destructive, antisocial behavior to celebrate itself unwitnessed because the problem here is the confrontation?

Elaborate on that. I dare you. Take it to its logical conclusion.

    We never aired it because we thought it was unethical to show hundreds of possibly inebriated people without consent.

And that is your choice. You made a personal decision on your personal content based on your personal ethics. Your personal ethics are incorrect, by the way: recording a person in a public place is entirely legal and entirely ethical. There is nothing obligating you from sharing your content but not doing so doesn't make you morally superior.

    This is why legitimate news organizations exist, and why they clear these things.

The argument has long been that "legitimate" news organizations are not accurately reflecting the facts on the ground. Thus the "activist" in "activist journalism." Your argument here is again one of poverty: if you don't make money at it you can't be an authority. Now, granted: there's an inertia to professional newscasting that sets a threshold. But that threshold is very much in flux, especially when a million dollars worth of broadcast gear is suddenly in jeopardy of this shit:

"chilling effect" is a term of art in US and Canadian law. This is an example. Thus, activist journalism becomes more important, not less.

    And let me tell you, the only reason me and my college buddies got up to that was because we clearly had way too much free time on our hands.

Just because your heart isn't in it doesn't mean others' aren't. And you just finished telling me that your three-months-ago heart was in it entirely too much.

user-inactivated  ·  1458 days ago  ·  link  ·  
This comment has been deleted.
kleinbl00  ·  1458 days ago  ·  link  ·  

This entire event would not exist if JD had backed off when asked. You know this, it's just inconvenient to your narrative. The rest of your prevarications are an attempt to mask the fact that a thug lost his job for thugging in public.

    Recording people in public places makes people very uncomfortable for a reason. They don't know where that's going to end up.

Anyone who flies across the country for a parade must assume a basic level of exposure, I don't care if it's Macy's. The exposure is the point.

You will gleefully bend your morality past the snapping point to win an argument. That's bitten you in the ass before, and will continue to do so. All it does is demonstrate that you care more about winning than about being correct.