[flagged]
Does that really need an in-depth analysis to point out how dumb that idea is?
Comments like that are why I left reddit - they do not foster discussion, they are low-effort attempts at getting updoots. If the only meaning that can be extracted from a comment is "I disagree", it shouldn't be a comment, it should be a downvote. It's a waste of an indentation level.
[0] If they're sitting in the same office as the US military, they're propagandists. Their job is to spread propaganda. They aren't going to suddenly catch a case of principles now. This is the class of people that keeps cheer-leading every disastrous military expedition the US goes on.
You package that as a statement of fact, but it is just your opinion.
> Their job is to spread propaganda.
Then why are they not paid by the government?
> They aren't going to suddenly catch a case of principles now.
Indeed, you could reasonably assume that they had a case of principles all along and that this violates those principles.
> This is the class of people that keeps cheer-leading every disastrous military expedition the US goes on.
Except... they don't. That's why they walked out, because they want to be free to write whatever they want to write.
You are just parroting the usual 'luegenpresse' shit.
> Then why are they not paid by the government?
They're not government propagandists. They're more an outcrop of the military-industrial complex propaganda and generally associated with the neocons from what I've seen. From the outside this looks like it might be a turf war between the Trumpists and the Neocons, but it is hard to be sure.
> You are just parroting the usual 'luegenpresse' shit.
If they put more effort into intellectually honest reporting of what the US military is doing it'd be harder to make the epithet stick. Always an option; a bunch of journalists do actually manage it. Just not so many of the ones literally sitting with the military. Someone like Snowden may well have walked past a lot of journalists at his day job, but I don't think any of them were leaking the large and credibly illegal government spying program.
Unlike yours, which are off topic and do not contribute at all.
> I with there was an "original thought" button that just showed root comments.
I think you meant 'wish', there is a little - mark at the beginning of each comment thread, if you click that the comments will collapse, there is also a 'start with collapsed comments' setting that only appears above 200K karma.
The journalists and the generals can presumably still talk to each other over drinks after work. The journalists were only ever going to be tolerated in the building because US leadership thinks they are helping them achieve military propaganda aims which are rarely noble things. There isn't much at stake here beyond classified information.
US classified information has been a bit of a disaster for them. It just means the government is slowly escaping accountability for what it does. They have that massive spying program on US citizens and the last I heard of the story was they can't sue anyone over it because the courts aren't allowed to believe it exists.
That is what makes it an interestingly complex issue. We have to form an opinion on whether it is likely to be a "better" narrative with the journalists in the building or in a building a few blocks away. That isn't an obvious one and it largely hinges on what access they were getting in the building that they weren't officially supposed to have and what they then did with it.
At that point you can just claim everyone working in the government is doing the same, or given the fact that they are working for the government it’s even worse since they’re employed full time (or were) to advance the government’s agenda!
Except that the government’s agenda is by and large the agenda of the people that it represents.
Not only is the point of view you’re expressing uselessly cynical, you’re depriving others of agency as well. It’s still a free country - press access doesn’t mean “government mouthpiece”. There are lots of news organizations and journalists with differing levels of professional standing and points of view and you can read all about them for yourself.
In this case the government's agenda is that these journalists should either get Hegseth to stamp their articles or pack their cardboard boxes and get out of the building. Make of that what you will.
> The reason they were in the building in the first place was to give the US government control over the narrative.
Them packing their boxes would imply that the US government doesn't want control of the narrative?
There's arguments that no journalists should be in the building, there's an argument that more eyes are always better and it is easier to keep track of these people if they are in the building.