Alright, well, what about the trial and concication of the driver?

Conviction*

Erhem

There is one massive flaw in your argument.

Trump did not call The Media the enemy of the People

he called Fake News the enemy of the people.

Which is an entirely true statement, but M5M knows that they are completely full of shit so to distract from the actual problem they just REEEEE about Trump wanting to beat up Journos

Ah, well his nuance is unmatched and attributions of fault are in turn unasailable, then. The completely full of shit broadcast networks, including sports scores and current temperature outside, yet remain scarcely named by network let alone by individual, had the judgement that virtually every utterance be dismissed as discredited

Coming to them

Umm

I am not a trumper you know.

so acting like i am defending him because I like him is insane.

The Broadcast Networks are entirely fine with Journalists getting jailed/murdered/unpersoned so long as they are the right ones.

Do you think they would utter a peep if a Democrat President would say the exact same thing Trump says about them about Fox News?

Not a fucking chance.

Would they have given a lick of shit about Kashoji if they couldn't use it to beat up Trump? Not Remotely, it would have been a 5 minute fart in the wind.

Fox news was very not cool woth Jim acosta being dismissed from press hearings...I'm not sure how you're able to so certainly conclude their sentiment in alternative realities, either. Is it possible le your at all,even just slightly wrong about them in that way ?

My answer. First the list.
Turkey 68
China 47
Egypt 25
Saudi Arabia 16
Eritrea 16
Vietnam 11
Azerbaijan 10
Iran 8
Cameroon 7
Bahrain 6
Syria 6
Those are journalist in prison according to Committee to Protect Journalists (cpj.org)

The second part. I would prefer a weighted index consisting of multiple data points, like, death, hostages, and harassment instead of only one set of parameter data point. _Reporters without Borders_ (Reporters sans frontiers) used to do this. Where all countries are listed.

My problem with the article is it written to push a narrative and the headline states, _ us added to list of most dangerous countries_ the section in the Reporters without borders is the List of Deadliest countries.

The report the article source and link to is the annual report from Reporters without borders.
The report contains three main sections. Reporters death. Reporters jailed, and reporters held hostage.

As I understand the facts laid out. The six reports death registered in the US consist of an a cameraman and news anchor killed during a storm. A reporter killed over a long running personal fued. The rest is the Gazette incidents.

@caykoh my reply above

My personal feeling. The article is written with the purpose to push the narrative that the USA is a dangerous countries for journalist. And to convey the message that it is one of the worst countries in that regards.
My feelings don’t care about your facts.

Wait say that last part again? Your feelings dont care about my facts ? Are facts that elastic to be "mine"

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

Compounded and weighted data points

Not “yours” per se but all facts. The saying goes facts don’t care about feelings. It is also possible to deduce that feelings don’t care about fact. Since in current year we are more emotional, facts are worthless.

"More and more democratically-elected leaders no longer see the media as part of democracy’s essential underpinning, but as an adversary to which they openly display their aversion. The United States, the country of the First Amendment, has fallen again in the Index undebbcr Donald Trump, this time two places to 45th. A media-bashing enthusiast, Trump has referred to reporters “enemies of the people,” the term once used by Joseph Stalin."

The above statement is a quote.

Yes from reg, sorry

Rsf

Correction to some of my statements above. I am a bit rusty since I longer have any interactions with RSF. I was not aware that the annual report of freedom index have been made into a website. I used to read the paper report. The RSF report that the article quoted was not the annual report but a _special_ report, as I assumed.

I think the site and its summaries and thoroughness are quite worth the read.

it seems like a viable argument, though in terms of actual deaths of our reporters I would argue we're not that high

the issue is that the legacy media is on the decline, so they're declining in quality as well.

soon they'll be tabloids.

hm...

perhaps the inevitable collapse can be prepared for using something like an independant journalist's guild?

Tim has hillariously low overhead, but his work ethic is... well, insane.

that being said, it's very true that all it takes to be a journalist now is a camera

a phone