Comment by neilv
8 days ago
> > I am preparing an article on the use of your secure personal data phone solution by drug traffickers and other criminals.
I think GrapheneOS needs a really good PR expert volunteer, or funding to pay for a non-volunteer.
My non-PR-expert guesses are... If the journalist is in bad faith or flaky, that might need to be handled. But if the journalist is in good faith, this might be an opportunity, to promote GrapheneOS and/or to start to head off adverse gov't actions there.
(GrapheneOS does some great technical work, and has given me what seems to be a more respectful and trustworthy smartphone than I could get from Apple or Google. Right now, I'd think many countries in Europe and elsewhere should be looking at something like GrapheneOS as a possible interim measure on their way to greater digital sovereignty. I understand that the French people especially value liberty.)
No, one should never ever talk to journalists. Nothing good can come from it. Never assume good faith from journalists.
Having helped run a furry convention, there are times you need to talk to members of the media. Otherwise, you have zero input in the narrative.
If you make the response boring or used a canned legalish message, it doesn’t allow them to say you didn’t talk to them.
A better rule is: don’t let anyone untrained talk to journalists.
The narrative already gets decided ahead of time and often there is nothing you can do to change it. In my opinion it's better to accelerate the distrust of journalists.
1 reply →
I am personally quite grateful that Edward Snowden talked to journalists.
It would have been better to leak directly to the government. If it he wanted the public to see it he could have leaked it directly to the public. It's the 21st century.
3 replies →
It's true with Indian journalists. You say one thing and they twist it the other way around.