It’s not the job of journalists to formulate claims, only to attribute them. Yes it sounds funny sometimes but that doesn’t mean that isn’t actually fucking important.
Considering said “journalists” don’t apply that rule consistently we can safely assume they’re not the gatekeepers of power, but rather its stenographers.
The hesitation to copy-paste claims goes right out of the window if the story involves a country or organization that contradicts the interests of empire.
It’s not the job of journalists to formulate claims, only to attribute them. Yes it sounds funny sometimes but that doesn’t mean that isn’t actually fucking important.
Is it a claim if it’s true? It’s crazy how you can defend that.
Maybe they should say she allegedly refused to work with them because of alleged war crimes? Would that work better for you?
I suppose it better be “Emma stone allegedly refused to work with alleged Israeli bla bla bla cuz of alleged genocidal alleged dickbaggery”
Considering said “journalists” don’t apply that rule consistently we can safely assume they’re not the gatekeepers of power, but rather its stenographers.
The hesitation to copy-paste claims goes right out of the window if the story involves a country or organization that contradicts the interests of empire.