|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
24th October 2019, 10:27 AM | #1 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
|
Harvard Crimson: Yes, we should ask for comment from ICE
I found this editorial from the Harvard Crimson quite interesting, the crux of the issue seems to be this:
Quote:
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...s-ice-comment/ As with the authors of the editorial, I thought it was standard practice to contact the subjects of an article (or the focus of a protest covered in an article.) for comment and they have the right the refuse such comment. The idea that the subject of an article (or the focus of a protest covered in an article.) should not be contacted because reading or hearing their words will 'cause harm' seems wrongheaded. |
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!" 'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail Everybody gets it wrong sometimes... |
|
24th October 2019, 10:51 AM | #2 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
There seems to be a bit of this going around lately. "The time for conversation and hearing all sides is over. The time for silencing and suppressing is now!"
|
24th October 2019, 11:56 AM | #3 |
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
|
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
24th October 2019, 12:25 PM | #4 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
|
I don't really know how likely a government agency with a kickass acronym for a name, that helps run concentration camps, is to respond to comment requests from a student newspaper, but this strikes me as a common courtesy for public officials, government departments, and anyone else with a RP office.
I won't say Act on a Dream has no right to object to this practice, and I can see why they would - immigration enforcement is particularly ugly under this administration - but I don't see why the Crimson staff should simply give in either... |
24th October 2019, 12:48 PM | #5 |
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,202
|
It's a fundamental principle of journalism to get all sides to every story, regardless of how wrong or bigoted or tasteless any particular side may be. How one communicates those sides can obviously vary depending on perspective, and one can easily slant a story that way; but refusal to do so is to abandon journalism entirely in favour of producing propaganda. |
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won. |
|
24th October 2019, 12:49 PM | #6 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
|
Of course the Crimson should have called for comment. The agency's answer could have been quite revealing. Sometimes the agency just makes things worse for itself with their comment. It's sad that anyone is discouraging the process. You *want* to give these people a chance to justify their practices, so readers will understand who they are.
Unlike a lot of people here I haven't made up my mind that ICE are evil, uniquely among law enforcement. I may detest a particular mission, but I can see why we need immigration enforcement. Maybe it's worth reorganizing and rebranding if the culture is particularly toxic, but you're never going to get rid of the actual mission; someone will still do that job. There is maybe not quite as strong a feeling that articles *must* get a comment or a refusal out of an agency, but it's only fair. You might not feel required to bend over backwards with repeated calls etc., because online is different than print; comment can always be added later if the agency sees it can't just let an accusation hang there. But you should always try, and always update a story if you get a belated comment, or even a pro forma refusal to comment. It's a horrible precedent not to. |
24th October 2019, 01:20 PM | #7 |
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
|
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
24th October 2019, 02:07 PM | #8 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 10,589
|
While I certainly don't approve of much of what ICE is doing under the current administration, I see calls for the abolition of ICE as much like calls for the abolition of the IRS: The job they do is a necessary one, and another agency with a different name, but most likely a lot of the same people, will have to be created to replace them. It will, in effect, be not much more than a name change.
|
24th October 2019, 02:14 PM | #9 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
|
24th October 2019, 02:53 PM | #10 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
|
The story seems to be getting wider interest. NBC and the Washington Post along with several right wing pundits are now talking about it.
Here is the Washington Posts article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...back-students/ In it is a great response from one of the reporters at the New York Times:
Quote:
|
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!" 'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail Everybody gets it wrong sometimes... |
|
24th October 2019, 02:59 PM | #11 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 60,375
|
|
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein. |
|
24th October 2019, 03:30 PM | #12 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
|
|
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!" 'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail Everybody gets it wrong sometimes... |
|
24th October 2019, 03:43 PM | #13 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 524
|
|
24th October 2019, 03:46 PM | #14 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
|
I think it's telling that the Crimson learned about Act on a Dream's complaint from social media. Did it not occur to the group to contact the Crimson directly? Or would that have given them less scope to use the complaint to spark a round of indignation? That doesn't really hold up either; they could have done both. This tendency to air grievances on social media while seemingly making no effort to just call up the paper and ask about the policy is not a good trend IMO. It would have been simple to do that. It tells me they weren't interested in learning more about the way reporting works; the point was complaining, not trying to understand the process. Oh well. That's their right, but it's a lazy way to do things: Complain publicly without bothering to engage with the subject of their criticism. Why temper your indignation with understanding? It's simpler to just present one side of the story.
It seems like a bizarre complaint to me. The paper called ICE for comment ? I'm not sure why they even care. If I can get past paywall I'll read the Post story. |
24th October 2019, 03:52 PM | #15 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
I don't think AD needed to talk to the Crimson. Their goal was to boycott the Crimson. For that, going straight to social media is the obvious choice. Talking to the Crimson just muddies the water with the paper's side of the story, and just confuses the target audience into thinking maybe the boycott isn't justified.
Kind of like how the Crimson trying to get ICE's side of the story risked undermining AD and confusing their narrative. This isn't about resolving a disagreement about proper reportage. This is all about getting your side of the story out there, avoiding alternative viewpoints as much as possible, and punishing anyone who gets in the way of that program however you can. |
24th October 2019, 04:12 PM | #16 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
|
Right. I get that, but they could have done both. What's the point of a boycott? Do they want the Crimson to un-call ICE? It just seems like a silly thing to protest over. They did succeed in calling attention to themselves, though, so maybe the Crimson did them a favor by calling ICE and giving them something to complain about.
|
24th October 2019, 04:38 PM | #17 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
|
I'm not too concerned with what he says, so I was more commenting on the OP.
deep breath So...let's be clear - the actual problem starts at the top, with Dolt 45. I have far less issue with the Obama-era policy of ICE concentrating on immigrants who have committed major crimes. And ICE isn't the group that patrols borders and separating families there - that's, um, Border Patrol, and man y of them hate doing it. However, Dolt 45's (and really, white nationalists like Steven Miller's) "zero tolerance" policy has led to parents being deported while their children are at school with no home to go back to, a major increase in sanctuary cities as governments try to reassure immigrants that they needn't worry about reporting crimes the witness or are harmed by, and so forth. (I'll also note that I prefer penalizing supposedly rich companies that hire undocumented immigrants, but Dolt 45 own several such companies, so that's why he prefers his "torture the spics" approach to anything rational. Well, that and his white supremacism of course.) But a lot of these distinctions get lost when people discuss immigration in general, particularly since ICE is the group that raids workplaces, churches, harasses people right outside courtrooms, and the like. It makes sense to help readers to understand these distinctions. I also note that the Crimson gave ICE no info on anyone they could harass or haul off. In short, I see no real issue - but protesting is almost a standard part of college life, so I'm not offended by that, either. |
24th October 2019, 04:43 PM | #18 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
To punish the Crimson for trying to get the other side of the story.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
24th October 2019, 04:55 PM | #19 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,280
|
Indeed.
Taking this a step further, an agency can comment to its specific mission and strategy, but its ultimate goals are determined legislatively. Having an issue with an agency, specifically, doesn't make a lot of sense, because they're just implementing the laws/rules those elected have assigned. |
24th October 2019, 04:56 PM | #20 |
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
|
Strictly speaking, those who advocate "abolishing ICE" do advocate that a replacement agency be created, not that those functions should be abandoned entirely - or at least that's my impression.
The feeling is that racism and anti-immigrant (not merely pro-immigration-law-enforcement) attitudes generally have suffused through the agency so thoroughly from top to bottom, that just changing a few bureaucrats at the organizational leadership level is no longer sufficient to solve the problem. ICE is the kind of agency that, like most law-enforcement agencies, is more or less continuously hiring due to turnover; and I don't think it's really controversial to believe that this administration's open racism and contempt for immigrants has attracted numbers of people with certain attitudes to apply, who obviously the current agency is not going to feel compelled to screen out. When the leaders are replaced, the boots on the ground will stay the same, and you can't change a culture with a memo. |
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
24th October 2019, 06:11 PM | #21 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
|
I don’t know. I need to read more. If you call an agency asking them to respond to complaints that they shouldn’t exist you’re probably not going to get a juicy quote unless the person in PR is having a really bad day and they make a smartass retort. Either way it’s not going to make the agency look good; it’s not going to make protesters look bad. They just sound ignorant to me. But I’m basing that only on what’s posted in this thread, and I may be wrong.
|
24th October 2019, 06:53 PM | #22 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,963
|
It's about proper journalistic practice, not violating anyone's free speech rights, technically.
There's no constitutional "right to be asked for comment" that I'm aware of, but it is a convention that many newspapers and other news organizations follow. When this convention isn't followed, mistakes tend to happen. Bad reporting happens. Reporters and their news organizations may end up with egg on their face. I think the silly part is the protestors demand that the Crimson not follow established journalistic practice in reporting the story. And their objection that asking ICE for comment somehow puts the protesters in danger doesn't stand up to scrutiny. |
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare |
|
24th October 2019, 07:10 PM | #23 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
|
12th November 2019, 04:07 PM | #24 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
|
Sadly the Harvard Undergraduate Council is not so understanding.
Quote:
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...-supports-aod/ |
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!" 'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail Everybody gets it wrong sometimes... |
|
12th November 2019, 04:39 PM | #25 |
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,360
|
Given this assault on good journalism and the assaults on fundamental rights by student groups . . . I can only conclude that the youth have gone crazy and the country is heading to a very bad place where the 1st Amendment means nothing.
|
__________________
Hello. |
|
12th November 2019, 05:01 PM | #26 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,571
|
|
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog. |
|
12th November 2019, 05:04 PM | #27 |
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,202
|
The cry of reactionaries in every single generation that sees substantial social change. The kids of today just don't respect the beliefs of their elders and betters. Funny how the only parts of the country that are in a bad place are the parts governed by reactionaries. The kids seem to be doing pretty well aside from that. |
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won. |
|
12th November 2019, 07:40 PM | #28 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,963
|
|
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare |
|
12th November 2019, 08:36 PM | #29 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,963
|
After reading the story, in the end it's just a symbolic statement of support with no actual practical effect. It "acknowledge[s] the concerns" and "recognize[s] the validity" of their feelings. And it barely managed to gather a plurality of support among the student council:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare |
|
12th November 2019, 09:02 PM | #30 |
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,360
|
I knew that was coming!
So I guess that confirms it...I am viewed as a reactionary. Anyway. I get it. I was being a little over the top there. And maybe the youth of today are right. Maybe the USA is just a little bit too free. I mean it’s possible that Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Speech are overblown Freedoms and there’s a good argument for allowing more restrictions. I’d like to hear that argument because I don’t think the youth of today are making a good case. Certainly this “Harvard Crimson don’t get a statement from ICE,” thing is not a good argument.
Quote:
|
__________________
Hello. |
|
13th November 2019, 10:11 AM | #31 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 6,092
|
Not sure if that's more common lately, or if it's just being applied more to people it previously wasn't.
I mean, the battles for equal treatment of women and minorities were (and still are) frequently met with "shut up about it", "now isn't the time", "don't push", etc, yes? So is this really a new thing? |
__________________
Promise of diamonds in eyes of coal She carries beauty in her soul |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|