Michael Grunwald (TIME reporter) Sends Out Shocking Tweet About Julian Assange
38 replies, posted
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/17/michael-grunwald-julian-assange_n_3773981.html[/url]
[quote=Huffington Post]A Time magazine reporter caused ire on Twitter Saturday night when he said that he "can't wait to write a defense of the drone strike that takes out" Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.
Michael Grunwald's tweet, since deleted, was quickly met with outrage and bewilderment. Glenn Greenwald, who recently broke several revelations about NSA surveillance programs based on documents provided to him by leaker Edward Snowden, was particularly vocal in expressing his disgust with Grunwald's statement.[/quote]
drone strike in the middle of london
good idea a++
Could have just been failed humor
[QUOTE=Aman;41876041]Could have just been failed humor[/QUOTE]
If it is, it's pretty shitty in the "declaring-it's-sarcasm" department at that.
I'm shocked.
I also hate that fucking buzzword.
"How dare Julian reveal how trigger happy we are with drone strikes. Let's drone him"
[url]https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/368895996928872448[/url]
[editline]17th August 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Aman;41876041]Could have just been failed humor[/QUOTE]
A joke has to be remotely funny to be a joke.
That man should not loose his job for a "shitty" tweet. And, those that are outraged are obviously "very sensitive people," and, they should be deemed too unstable to use the internet. At worst he just gave a "low-brow" blow to the whole situation. At best, he was simply commenting on the situation and worded it poorly. He shouldn't loose his job over it.
[QUOTE=TylerWindings;41876228]That man should not loose his job for a "shitty" tweet. And, those that are outraged are obviously "very sensitive people," and, they should be deemed too unstable to use the internet. At worst he just gave a "low-brow" blow to the whole situation. At best, he was simply commenting on the situation and worded it poorly. He shouldn't loose his job over it.[/QUOTE]
When you wish death upon someone else that has done nothing but trickle out classified information, I think you should be considered not only extremely unprofessional but I think it's something that only a psychopath would say.
He should lose his job over it because he's wishing death upon a fellow journalist.
Maybe he wasn't serious?
TIME magazine has been going to shit, I cancelled my subscription a few months ago after they stopped hard-hitting cover stories with actual news and replaced them with shit like "Why mom liked you best!".
[QUOTE=TylerWindings;41876228]That man should not loose his job for a "shitty" tweet. And, those that are outraged are obviously "very sensitive people," and, they should be deemed too unstable to use the internet. At worst he just gave a "low-brow" blow to the whole situation. At best, he was simply commenting on the situation and worded it poorly. He shouldn't loose his job over it.[/QUOTE]
And so would you wish death upon someone IRL too?
[QUOTE=TylerWindings;41876272]Maybe he wasn't serious?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;41876058]If it is (sarcasm), it's pretty shitty in the "declaring-it's-sarcasm" department at that.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;41876262]When you wish death upon someone else that has done nothing but trickle out classified information, I think you should be considered not only extremely unprofessional but I think it's something that only a psychopath would say.
He should lose his job over it because he's wishing death upon a fellow journalist.[/QUOTE]
[del]His tweet does not really imply that he wants Assange dead[/del]
It seems to me more like he just made a dark, stupid joke (poking fun at the US/trigger-happy stereotype), and incredibly unprofessional for someone who's working for something like Time
[editline]a[/editline]
Just after hitting post I see how "I can't wait" suggests a desire for his death. I hadn't interpreted it that way, but I see how people could
[QUOTE=TylerWindings;41876228]That man should not loose his job for a "shitty" tweet. And, those that are outraged are obviously "very sensitive people," and, they should be deemed too unstable to use the internet. At worst he just gave a "low-brow" blow to the whole situation. At best, he was simply commenting on the situation and worded it poorly. He shouldn't loose his job over it.[/QUOTE]
A journalist's job is the words they publish. They need to be held accountable for them.
I'm sorry, but you people are taking this a bit too seriously. I highly doubt this was serious. You get pissed over the guy who made the joke about assassinating Obama to being reported to the Feds, but you take this sarcastic looking Twitter post seriously?
[QUOTE=matt000024;41876776]I'm sorry, but you people are taking this a bit too seriously. I highly doubt this was serious. You get pissed over the guy who made the joke about assassinating Obama to being reported to the Feds, but you take this sarcastic looking Twitter post seriously?[/QUOTE]
There's a large difference between some random person on Facepunch and an influential reporter working for one a very highly respected publication like TIME.
honestly that tweet reads extremely sarcastically, saying "can't wait to write the defense" seriously screams criticism about journalism and TIME encouraging him to take a stance that's pro-obama.
He should have added "Lol" and "jk" too the end of it, everyone would be okay with it then.
Maybe throw in something about finding Julian's body and eating his hopefully still beating heart, just to make the tweet pop a little more
[QUOTE=Zombii;41876802]There's a large difference between some random person on Facepunch and an influential reporter working for one a very highly respected publication like TIME.[/QUOTE]
It is still a double standard. Doesn't it matter more what is said than who exactly said it? It was still an insincere twitter post and yes it was unprofessional, but we've all done some unprofessional things.
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;41876172]
A joke has to be remotely funny to be a joke.[/QUOTE]
for once this is actually good dark humor. fp loves to think that jokes about 9/11 and the oslo massacre are just "dark humor" but this is how it's actually supposed to look
[QUOTE=supersnail11;41876016]drone strike in the middle of london
good idea a++[/QUOTE]
Not like the UK would do anything about it with the wy things have been going.
I think he is saying that as sarcasm. Like TIME will force him to defend America.
[QUOTE=matt000024;41876835]It is still a double standard. Doesn't it matter more what is said than who exactly said it? It was still an insincere twitter post and yes it was unprofessional, but we've all done some unprofessional things.[/QUOTE]
It's not at all a double standard. Grunwald is a journalist, speaking publicly through his Twitter that carries his real name. Although his statements obviously don't directly represent the viewpoints of TIME, people will still associate them with the publication. By not acting professionally, he's not only hurting his own image, he's also hurting the image of the company he writes for. Who's some anonymous guy on a web forum hurting by not acting professionally? Who exactly does he represent but his anonymous persona?
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;41876837]for once this is actually good dark humor. fp loves to think that jokes about 9/11 and the oslo massacre are just "dark humor" but this is how it's actually supposed to look[/QUOTE]
Dark for the sake of being dark isn't comedy. It's just being a try-hard edgy dumbass.
[editline]17th August 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=matt000024;41876835]It is still a double standard. Doesn't it matter more what is said than who exactly said it? It was still an insincere twitter post and yes it was unprofessional, but we've all done some unprofessional things.[/QUOTE]
Difference is, his name is attached to his Twitter handle. His Twitter profile states his occupation. That's the difference. Why would I want to read an article or even a magazine affiliated with this douchebag?
I'm not going to.
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;41876369]And so would you wish death upon someone IRL too?[/QUOTE]
It sounded to me like "Man, it won't be long now before the US just blows him up"
Not, "Oh man, I can't wait for Assange to get killed!"
Even though I know the latter is pretty much exactly what he typed.
It sounded to me a lot like "They're probably going to take him out and then my publishers will force me to write an article defending the action."
[QUOTE=supersnail11;41876016]drone strike in the middle of london
good idea a++[/QUOTE]
Not only that, but on a [b]foreign embassy[/b] in the middle of London.
Wow.
[url]http://archive.is/KtnuJ[/url]
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;41876929]Dark for the sake of being dark isn't comedy. It's just being a try-hard edgy dumbass.[/QUOTE]
dark for the sake of being dark? what? huh??
What's up with their names though?
Michael Grunwald and Glen Greenwald?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.