• SterlingVapor@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s a courtesy you can extend, but mostly it’s a protection against libel - if they take you to court about a claim they dispute, being able to say “your honor, we gave them a chance to respond before going public”

    In this case, there’s no dispute over facts - they didn’t bring up any accusations, they just took what LTT posted publicly and presented criticisms of it

    For example, if you report on the president being accused of misconduct you might ask the white house for comment, but if you are criticizing a speech they made or their public actions you probably wouldn’t (unless you think they’ll give you something that improves the story)

    • Animortis@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      OK, this I can agree with. And in fairness I was never writing about a big, constantly-updated video channel that was continually talking about itself. But it still screams to me there needs to be a chance at letting them respond.