• lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Because it was frequently in the press? There’s no shortage of links to news reports & stories in the wikipedia articles on the victims, cases, topics.

        • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Because the reporters did their job? You know these reports started before social media was mainstream, right?

            • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              You can read up, can’t you? I didn’t claim

              billionaire media owners will [gag victims from exercising their freedom of speech], mostly

              So, I’m asking how that (apparent counterfactual) works. Does it withstand scrutiny?

              • DrSteveBrule@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 hours ago

                I’m not saying you claimed anything. I’m asking what relevance there is as to whether the women made their claims on social media or not. I’m genuinely confused by the first comment of yours I replied to.

                • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 hours ago

                  If anyone can pretty much publicize whatever they want online, then are billionaire media owners gagging their freedom of speech? I’m genuinely confused at your confusion.

                  The view that major, billionaire-owned journalism companies can gag anyone from exercising their freedom of speech like they’re the only game in town seems outmoded when independent online media & journalism (where practically anyone can call themselves journalist) has disrupted that order since a while ago, and anyone can publish their words online in social media. That claim that may have made sense decades ago doesn’t fit online media today.