“I just deleted a tweet that lacked nuance,” two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter David Philipps said.
I understand the need for state secrets. The technical capabilities of weapons systems, the identity of spies, battle plans, the codes to launch nuclear missiles, etc. all need a certain level of secrecy in the modern world and always have. However, there is a difference between necessary secrets and criminal cover-ups.
While the items above may be reasonable secrets to keep, others are not. How well Ukraine is doing in their war against Russia or how many civilians were killed in U.S. air strikes aren't secrets that should be kept. That's information necessary for U.S. citizens to intelligently select their leaders. Not that there are really reasonable choices of course. It isn't even just that information like that is kept secret. It's that lies are told about their reality. Refusing to release that information is bad enough but downright lying about it is far worse.
It used to be that the press served as a check and balance against a corrupt government. That seems to no longer be the case but I suppose it hasn't been for quite a while now. These days, the New York Times seems more interested in helping the government arrest those who would expose embarrassing government cover-ups and lies than exposing the cover-ups and lies themselves. The lesson here is apparently, if you are a whistleblower, you better have your leaks approved by the NYT (and/or other "official" media) and the government first. That is the "nuance" that you need to keep in mind.
Congratulations, your post has been upvoted by @upex with a 0.25% upvote. We invite you to continue producing quality content and join our Discord community here. Keep up the good work! #upex
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit