Comment by BadHumans
2 years ago
> Unless otherwise noted, none of the militia members mentioned in this story responded to requests for comment
This is a serious story but this made me burst out laughing. Sorry, the PR agent for these heavily armed militias was unable to return my request for comments.
It’s just good journalism to give everyone in a story a chance to defend their position, even if those opportunities are often not taken up.
I have seen journalists give 24 hr to defend your position. Many times it’s zero time.
Well they have to strike some compromise between readers expecting timely news and story subjects responding to accusations, especially when they’re competing against the Joe Rogans of the world with no professional ethics whatsoever.
24 hours is reasonable. At the very least you can say “I will provide a response but it will take 7 days” and they can note that in the article and update later.
No time is usually reserved for breaking news. No outlet is going to hold a story on today’s building fire because the fireworks factory owner deserves 24 hours to respond.
In the recent case between the actress and the film director for ‘ it ends with us’ one of the sides gave the other a few hours to respond on the last working day of the year.
1 reply →
I think that's bad journalism
4 replies →
The confusion comes from thinking these are organized groups with a solid chain of command, author seems wildly uninformed.
Most are loose gatherings of people who like shooting guns where people come and go week to week.
The one who seems confused is you, the section in the article talks about members themselves not some imaginary PR person.