People sometimes talk about privacy like it's a single thing that people want more or less of, when it's really a number of different things that people put different values on.
A key element in the shift in US public opinion toward attacking ISIS is the idea that the country could be attacked by the group. Where do people get this idea? TV news might be one place.
The Newspaper of Record wants you to know that you shouldn't trust Twitter's coverage of Ferguson. But their examples of inaccuracies aren't all that convincing
Remember how corporate media's campaign coverage used to offer wide-ranging, diverse perspectives? Me neither. But Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank apparently thinks that's the way the world used to work, until Twitter came along and the press corps turned into one giant exercise in groupthink. He writes today (10/24/12) that campaign reporters have one eye on the actual debates, and one eye on social media: This was to have been the campaign when Twitter and other social media allowed new voices to enter the debate, delivering a more diverse array of opinion and helping candidates reach beyond the media filter. […]