Added: Tyler Bruss - Date: 29.11.2021 21:27 - Views: 24948 - Clicks: 5695
On Thursday morning, the hosts of an Australian radio show invited listeners to call in if they suspected their partners of cheating. A female caller griped about her husband for a moment, and then the hosts of the Fitzy and Wippa Show typed in his address. That ethical queasiness has—or should have—afflicted journalists everywhere writing about the data dump, which involves the stolen personal data of almost 32 million Ashley Madison users going back to , including names, birth dates, and partial credit card s. Within hours of the data being posted on the Tor network, there was an easy way to search any address online to see if it showed up in the Ashley Madison client database.
A slew of articles followed. Gawker outed Josh Duggar , the star of 19 Kids and Counting, and supposed model family man. The Washington Post wrote about patterns in the aggregate data, like how people lie about their birthdays , for example. The Associated Press used Internet Protocol addresses to identify users in the White House who logged in from their work computers, though not necessarily with their work s.
The hacked data is not entirely reliable. In addition, an online user does not prove that somebody cheated. The hackers, who call themselves the Impact Team , said after the initial breach that they hacked Ashley Madison because it was both immoral and fraudulent. The data is out there, and as long as we apply the journalistic standards of newsworthiness, public interest, and minimizing harm, why not treat it like any other information?
Guzman dismisses that argument. We should know who they are. In this case , the source of the information could undermine the credibility of the reporting, said Sean Sposito, a reporter and data specialist at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. He argues that even downloading and searching the data is questionable, regardless of whether it will be published.
Even partial credit card s, dates of birth? People lie in online profiles all the time. An AP journalist took a more sophisticated approach to mining the data. They include two assistant U. Guzman says that instead of focusing solely on the of the hack, journalists should be focusing on the perpetrators. So far, there have been few repercussions—for companies or hackers—despite high profile leaks at places like Target, Home Depot, and Sony.
Has America ever needed a media watchdog more than now? Help us by ing CJR today. This week, Congressional wrangling once again rose to the top of the news cycle. The voice of journalism Us. Tammy Kim. Journalists are missing the most important part.Columbia discreet affairs
email: [email protected] - phone:(363) 187-2925 x 9861
Woodrow Wilson's Changing Views of the Senate