Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Dopefish on Tuesday February 18 2014, @12:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the freedom-is-not-free dept.

combatserver writes:

"While The Guardian and The New York Times reported on the NSA targeting of data leaked by popular mobile apps, independent sources produced highly-detailed articles--accompanied by source material--that paint a much broader picture of NSA capabilities and intent. Recent restrictions imposed on journalists--a result of corporate influence, editorial decisions, and threats against journalists--combined with the ease of establishing a website, might be driving a new era in journalism.

The Intercept recently announced a shift towards independent reporting with the creation of their own news outlet, free of the constraints imposed on journalists by 'Big Media' and governments. Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill have joined forces to provide the world with an alternative, perhaps blazing a path towards a fundamental change in how news is reported and distributed. SoylentNews can play a significant role in this shift towards journalistic freedom--we share many common core-ideals, and can give voice to independent news sources.

The Big Question: How will 'Big Media' and governments react to this shift in journalism?"

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 18 2014, @01:26PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 18 2014, @01:26PM (#1581)

    You know how there's a huge fight somewhere that is a huge deal to those involved but nobody else ever heard of it? Like the China-Vietnam war of 1979? Tens of thousands died, and yet it made no waves. The whole journalists vs. bloggers thing is like that. Journalists *freaking hate* bloggers. It's a huge deal in their world, and they are forever attempting to discredit the implacable foe. Whenever a blogger scores a major win like Matt Drudge (Lewinski) or Charles Johnson (Rathergate), journalists blow their tops because it should rightfully be them who get the adulation and praise.

    Moreover, being shown up as negligent in their roles of watchdog and exposer of corruption burns burns burns, like a burning ring of fire. Naturally, instead of resolving to do better in the future, they attack the messenger in hopes of scoring a final victory that will forever discredit bloggers in the public eye.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=1, Underrated=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 18 2014, @01:48PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 18 2014, @01:48PM (#1598)

    I am not sure that is always true. A lot of original material comes from Bloggers. A great number of bloggers focus intently on specific issues. Take copyright litigation, for example. At any point in time, there are a TON of patent and copyright trolling cases being litigated. A main-stream journalist cannot afford the time to watch all of them for a major outcome. A blogger will dig up important details, and blog about them. A journalist who frequents Twitter may notice a buzz of activity about a specific issue on a blog, and write about it. I see journalist and bloggers as having more of a mutually-beneficial relationship, with things percolate up from the ether, and become mainstream news because of bloggers.

  • (Score: 0, Offtopic) by Pav on Tuesday February 18 2014, @01:50PM

    by Pav (114) on Tuesday February 18 2014, @01:50PM (#1600)

    Completely OT but... your post was #1581 (for people who know what that number means).