Some critics retaliated by posting reporters' and editors' addresses and other personal information online.
Howard Good, a journalism professor ... called the critics' response childish and petulant.
"It doesn't move the issue of gun control to the level of intelligent public discussion," he said. "Instead, it transforms what should be a rational public debate on a contentious issue into ugly gutter fighting."
Not to sound like a 5yo, but they started it.
Sauce for the goose, turnabout is fair play, let's see how they like it, etc.
NoVaJohn said:
Did they post the names of Domestic Violence victims?
...they must have KNOWN that they would be putting these peoples' lives in danger like they had done in VA.
Yes, they did post names & addresses of DV victims who had been hiding from their abusers.
One pro-gun reporter said he'd gotten calls & emails from several such women, worried that now they were targets again.
And yes, they knew exactly what would happen when they published that information, 'cause they'd done it before, with exactly the same result they got this time, only not as fast 'cause social media is in place this time.
Tanner said:
The "whole concept" is implied in the conversation! I dont think it is that unclear what I meant.
Citizen said:
Your a$$ still didn't answer the question. Are you opposed to the publishing of gun owner names and locations, dissemination of the publishers' personal info, or both?
I have the same question, because Tanner's statement can be taken both ways. No, it's not clear what you meant. Your statement was ambiguous, which is why we're asking for clarification. Getting pi$$y about it won't make your position any clearer. You could have clarified instead of being a smart-alec.
peter nap said:
If you had a hundred people to stand on the sidewalk in front, it would be effective.
I like that idea. The sidewalk is public property. Walking a picket line with signs explaining exactly why you're there, what wrong was committed that you are protesting, I think would be very effective. Have a few people around the clock for a couple weeks at the home of the reporter, the editors, the CEO...
