Alternatively, we can try to build a culture that rejects surveillance journalism and uses pseudonymity, encryption, and incentives to defend privacy.

These media corporations are just Stasi with stock symbols. They will wiretap people for profit & revenge. Need a better way. https://twitter.com/msuster/status/1279451483155529730">https://twitter.com/msuster/s...

To be clear, I am deeply sympathetic to @msuster’s worries here.

I don’t believe we should live in fear of either the mobs enabled by social media corporations or the for-profit wiretapping of legacy media corporations.

Need a better way.
https://twitter.com/msuster/status/1279451483155529730?s=21">https://twitter.com/msuster/s... https://twitter.com/msuster/status/1279451483155529730">https://twitter.com/msuster/s...

We can start developing cultural inoculants against surveillance journalism.

It is simply not ok for some random corporation to be able to secretly record you without your consent. It’s even worse than the Stasi, they’re making money from this stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frui...

People talk about truth in media, but an even deeper point is that these employees of media corporations see themselves as vigilantes with extralegal powers.

No, inheriting a newspaper does not give you the right to invade someone’s privacy. Divine right of kings ended long ago.

We essentially have government by Russell Conjugation.

The same action is deemed legitimate if this gang of unelected bloggers does it and illegitimate if you do it.

You “doxx”
She “leaks”
But the NYT “investigates”

This double standard is the core of their power. End it.

An important point is that there is no formal license to be a corporate journalist. No MD or JD equivalent.

Instead there is *informal* license. If you are a member of this clique, you can print dangerous misinformation and never run a correction. https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1242006583535489024">https://twitter.com/balajis/s...