We’re actively blocking the rest of the world’s efforts to stop netanyahu’s genocide. That clearly makes us a responsibility party. The intercept is one of the few sources of actual journalism in the US.
The Intercept? Are you kidding me?! They are openly committed to advocacy journalism. They don’t even make a pretense of trying to be fair-minded, objective or operating in good-faith. Greenwald is an attorney who’s openly said that he approaches journalism the same way he approaches a case as a litigator.
I am a journalist by formal academic training --though I don’t really work in the business anymore-- and I can tell you for a fact that The Intercept is basically a case study in how many different ways a publication can violate SPJ’s code of ethics. They are a fucking disgrace to the profession and it’s galling that people like you take them seriously.
Oh, I’d bet they’d totally have an effect if they weren’t vetoed.
If countries want to do something, they don’t need the UN for it. The UN is literally just the accumulated efforts of all the countries that are part of it.
If they actually wanted to do something, the US saying “lol nah” shouldn’t stop them.
We’re actively blocking the rest of the world’s efforts to stop netanyahu’s genocide. That clearly makes us a responsibility party. The intercept is one of the few sources of actual journalism in the US.
The Intercept? Are you kidding me?! They are openly committed to advocacy journalism. They don’t even make a pretense of trying to be fair-minded, objective or operating in good-faith. Greenwald is an attorney who’s openly said that he approaches journalism the same way he approaches a case as a litigator.
I am a journalist by formal academic training --though I don’t really work in the business anymore-- and I can tell you for a fact that The Intercept is basically a case study in how many different ways a publication can violate SPJ’s code of ethics. They are a fucking disgrace to the profession and it’s galling that people like you take them seriously.
Why’d you leave journalism?
Have you actually read this lawsuit? It asks for things that US courts simply cannot do.
Are they doing something other than vetoing UN resolutions? Cause those are about as effective as protest voting for third parties in US elections.
BECAUSE OF US VETOES.
Jesus.
Oh, I’d bet they’d totally have an effect if they weren’t vetoed.
If countries want to do something, they don’t need the UN for it. The UN is literally just the accumulated efforts of all the countries that are part of it.
If they actually wanted to do something, the US saying “lol nah” shouldn’t stop them.
They’re that ineffective when you have a veto power in your back. Otherwise they can do a lot.