8 ms·
One of their journalists also doxxed Naomi Wu, intruding on her personal life, making her lose her income, and possibly getting her in trouble with Chinese auth
by nekitamo 5mo ago
One of their journalists also doxxed Naomi Wu, intruding on her personal life, making her lose her income, and possibly getting her in trouble with Chinese authorities:
https://x.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1209815150376574976 https://x.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1209815150376574976
The journalist themselves is a real piece of work:
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/463503-sarah-jeong-out-at-new-york-times-editorial-board/ https://thehill.com/homenews/media/463503-sarah-jeong-out-at...
Kinda goes to show you the kind of people who write these stories. Ethics haven't been on their mind for a long time, and them preaching to anyone about ethics is rank hypocrisy.
- shevy-java 5mo ago> Kinda goes to show you the kind of people who write these stories. People can opt to not read and pay such people.
- bilekas 5mo agoFunny enough in her own words, they don't much care.. > You’re wrong. NYT does pay attention to subscriber cancellations. It’s one of the metrics for “outrage” that they take to distinguish between “real” outrage and superficial outrage. What subscribers say can back up dissenting views inside the paper about what it should do and be.
- mptest 5mo agofor a good counterbalance to those just finding out the nyt is a state dept mouthpiece at best, read about real journalists and why there seem to be so few of them, read Pegasus by laurent richard. Spoiler alert, real journalists who expose powerful peoples' wrongdoings simply get killed.
- omnimus 5mo agoOne of the journalists was Jason Koebler who later cofounded 404media. That is imho pretty legit outlet which uncovered many pretty damning stories about tech.
- mptest 5mo ago404media is good stuff, one of the few news outlets I pay for. I didn't dig too deep on the above comment because I have a deep respect for journalists despite admittedly many of them servicing things I dislike by choice or coercion or for remuneration or fame, etc. Reading about journalists in more authoritarian countries was seriously depressing
- mememememememo 5mo agoYep Googlers... Metans... don't throw stones.
- api 5mo agoReminds me of a related principle: “How do you know if a conspiracy theorist is really on to something?” “Check the missing persons list.”
- margalabargala 5mo agoGlen Greenwald is alive and kicking.
- chad_c 5mo agoAlong with his zero credibility. Dude torched his career just like Taibbi.
- margalabargala 5mo agoSure but releasing the Snowden files wasn't what did that. He did that all by himself cozying up to Russia.
- bilekas 5mo ago> “Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men,” Jeong said in one tweet from 2014 that has since been deleted. You weren't messing, she seems lovely.. /s
- mlrtime 5mo ago[flagged]
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- MidnightRider39 5mo agoLet me shed a tear for the old white men, who hold all the money and power in today’s world p- these heinous social media “attacks” will leave them crying and shaking
- bilekas 5mo agoI really didn't want to comment on this, but racism, ironically enough doesn't discriminate. If you want to discriminate against white rich people, you then say that you wouldn't against black rich people. I'm not saying you shouldn't feel upset about rich people's behavior, but their skin color shouldn't enter the conversation.
- MidnightRider39 5mo agoI don’t want to discriminate against anyone - my point is that you can’t discriminate against people who hold all the power, so I won’t have much sympathy if someone trolls them online. And yea I believe anyone who is really rich (like 8+ figures rich) is morally bankrupt.
- mlrtime 5mo agoYou just did, all white men do not hold all the power. That is racism.
- omnimus 5mo agoI am not sure this is that clear cut. Naomi Wu agreed to interview then didn't want to answer some of the questions - instead of just saying no… she wrote social media threads and blogposts about how she can't talk about this because it's big bad china and all these western journalists are unprofessional not knowing her risk. For some reason then she tried to actually dox one of the journalists in her video. Unfortunately looking back it seems pretty plausible that chinese gov censored her exactly because of her blogposts about how she is in danger in china.
- mike_hearn 5mo agoHow do you "dox" a journalist? Are they writing under anonymous bylines now?
- SpecialistK 5mo agoBy releasing personal information which a reasonable person would expect to be private? I don't know the specifics of this case (only responding to the overly vague question) but information like address, private contact info, details about their families. Anything you would not immediately expect to become public knowledge simply by writing about topic(s).
- ghaff 5mo agoIn the US at least owning a residence is public record. It can be obfuscated with shell companies and things like that but most people don’t do.
- omnimus 5mo agoPutting home address of one of the journalists in a video when you have milion subscribers (many of which know about your beef)... that's not fun.
- lewi 5mo agoThe journalist knew what she was doing. Naomi was in China, agreed to do an interview about her self & her work, then the journo tried to drum up clicks by putting her on the spot about politics. Real consequences for the interviewee, all for some clicks. That's not journalism.
- dncornholio 5mo agoAre you able to explain in 1 short sentence what Vice did wrong to her? Because I can't. I remember reading Wu's explanation and couldn't find anything in there, like at all. It was filled with prejudice.
- decimalenough 5mo agoThey outed her as lesbian, in a country where this is increasingly unacceptable.
- hunter67 5mo agowhen journalism is a business, stuff like this happens...
- mhb 5mo agoAnd it's always been a business.
- hunter67 5mo agobut there's also state funded journalism, so they are not forced to do whats commercially viable
- mhb 5mo agoAnd then it's a business that is funded by political patronage.
- hunter67 5mo agookay so the police is a business too? Just like private security firms?
- mhb 5mo agoThe point is that, just like journalists if they are paid by the government, the police also have biases regarding which laws to enforce. I suppose you consider the BBC a shining example of unbiased reporting?
- eru 5mo agoThey deliver what readers what.
- account42 5mo agoThat would imply that the readers are the customers.
- Fokamul 5mo agoBtw I don't know how closely you follow Naomi Wu, but take that with grain of salt. (def. not defending bad journalists) Naomi has huge youtube and she is very public figure in Shenzhen. She has very weird opinion on Chinese government, she acts to like it but on the other hand with her sexual orientation (which was public knowledge, plastered all over reddit, twitter etc. way before any articles) and her admitting to bypass Chinese firewall etc. which is illegal. Kinda weird, to do this, when you're public person. And weirdest of all, she has/had Uyghur girlfriend and she basically said, that because of us (US/EU people) boycotting China for Xinjiang concentration camps for Uyghurs, nobody in Shenzen wants to hire Uyghur people, so WE are to blame. I don't know if she really meant it, or she'd post it to twitter to suck Chinese government, you know what. Imho, with grain of salt too, I think she was partially managed by Chinese agency way before any articles, and they got angry because she was unable to steer the article to "China great, West is bad". Because I have experience what Chinese agencies are willing to pay for mediocre influencers in my small EU country (10mil. people) just to visit China and make videos how they're "great". And they have 1/10 following of what Naomi has.
- eru 5mo ago> A third tweet posted by Jeong in 2014 said, “Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins.” It's not like she's any browner..
- richbell 5mo agoI moderated a large Reddit community (circa 2014). She threatened to have articles written about how we were racist/misogynistic, unless we removed comments she didn't like. Her being nasty elsewhere doesn't surprise me...
- type0 5mo agoIncredible, some people think that minorities can't be racist, by that definition Japanese weren't at all racist in 1937 Nanjing.
- Jerrrrrrrry 5mo ago[flagged]
- moomin 5mo agoThere’s a context to that you’re missing. The people saying that are usually using the formulation that racism = prejudice + power. So can black people in the U.K. be prejudiced? Yes, definitely. Racist? They’d need to be in a position of authority for it to matter. Other people use the formulation racism = prejudice about race, and end up talking past each other.
- smallmancontrov 5mo agoThere's a term for that: systemic racism. The redefining racism thing just comes from a bunch of people who wanted to be racist without admitting racism -- often, ironically, from a position of power.
- margalabargala 5mo ago