Subbu's piece builds on the framework he developed in this June 2024 piece on pro-democracy journalism. kettering.org/to-counter-a...

Yes Andy, and thank you. I forgot to give Paul and Burt the link to insert into the schedule. I’ll do that today. DM me your email and I’ll send you the deck anyway.

Great Q. There is no openly and transparently justified value-add, it just isn't in the premise. It seems to come from a misplaced assumption about the worth of journalistic power itself. That reflexive neutrality to describe power is a higher norm than using democratic culture as the yardstick.

And that unfinished sentence is still there this afternoon, March 17th, 2025.

Perhaps they find the sheer acts of documenting executive orders and actions in plain written word too bothersome?

And I wrote about this very thing here. And I explained why journalistic practice owes democracy every day.
kettering.org/to-counter-a...

t/h @carlamurphy.bsky.social

Hi Surya, would you DM me you email? I saw the CITP article on your work (Feb 14) and liked the rare point you made about giving people agency. Would like to check in with you more, and include your views in stuff I might write. I am an engineer like you who got into journalism and much later ethics

Thank you for the reply Eric. This is a chronic editorial ethics issue that plagues journalism.

Eric, did they allow you to sign off or veto the final edited version of your piece? I.e. did you have the option to say NO to running such a piece with your name on it, given the editing?

(I'm considering making this a use case for my work on editorial policy and I wanted to ask you this first!)

None. 😅

t/h @iethics.bsky.social

I see this very vague line at the bottom: "Update 12/16/24 9:15am ET: This article has been updated to clarify language that had been changed in the editing process."

@wired.com editors, you need to be more accountable. What (all) did you update? And was it in response to the authors' post here?