The clear contrast between a terror anyone can identify with - being detained for nine hours while transiting through a foreign country - and the state’s obscure use of terrorism law. The alignment of argument with information. The sensation of a political opening, through which the story can be driven.
“Having been through this and not written about it on the day for operational reasons, I was sort of waiting for a moment when the government’s attitude to journalism - when there was an issue that made this relevant,” Rusbridger said. Now we want the stuff back?” Michael Calderone of the Huffington Post asked Rusbridger about that. All day today, people have been asking me: why did The Guardian wait a month to tell us about, “You’ve had your fun. What to hold back, when not to publish, how not to react when provoked, what not to say in your own defense: alongside the forensic, the demands of the prudential.
It’s impossible to criticize Rusbridger, though, who has become the premiere editor of his generation with the paper’s fearless work on News Corporation, Wikileaks, and the NSA-world-shaking stories that have all come in the span of three years.Īnd as Jay Rosen is shrewd to note, Rusbridger sat on the smashed-hard-drives story until just the right moment: Those who would expose and oppose the security state also need good judgment. Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger’s bombshell column Monday night was one of the biggest pieces of media news in recent years.īut as the HuffPost’s Michael Calderone points out, the paper stuffed it on page 28 with just a teaser on page one.
0 kommentar(er)
