This is a bit of a tangent, but I assumed journalism was dead as soon as "two party consent" started (not sexual, it's recording evidence of a crime). Even WITH context, you can't record people committing crimes without their consent. This completely negates the abilities of whistle blowers. Also, thank GOD NPR is publicly funded. Cutting 1% is a hilariously impotent attempt at cutting funding.
this post was submitted on 02 May 2025
262 points (100.0% liked)
United States | News & Politics
2839 readers
675 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
Post anything related to the United States.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Good points, however the regime is now threatening journalists with treason charges for publishing constitutionally protected speech. So I think it's a bit of an escalation.
I agree. "A bit", is an understatement
This completely negates the abilities of whistle blowers.
lol, no. Whistleblowers are still able to write stuff down and testify. Recordings can still be thrown out of record but prosecutor doesn’t think you’re crazy anymore and might appeal for an exception.
Personal witnesses are easily discounted due to human error. You can write down whatever you want to, you can say whatever you want to. Unless you have a recording, it didn't happen. Sorry if you didn't know that. That's true for court and human beings in general. If there's a large number of witnesses, that may help, but public hysteria is also a thing. Also, Gina... did you really use your name and face for your account? You should change that. That's boomer levels of negligence.
If you live in America it's time to buy a gun and start training.
Make those paper targets look like uniformed and non uniformed ICE agents.
I think we’re past using “begin” at this point.