Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevinalexbrown | Hacker News Reader

The fact that the negotiations were done in secret probably means that most of the TTP content is being given to journalists by those officially authorized to speak about it. This isn't unexpected, but it does affect how the TTP is framed (even if you don't buy the Greenwald puff-piece-for-access argument).

View on HN

I'm not sure how this even makes sense. The whole treaty will be public for months before Congress votes on it. What's the "give to get" you're thinking of here?

Journalists will be interested in publishing articles about TPP today, rather than a month from now. That interest might lead one to lend a friendly ear to the only people who have actually read the current draft, who just so happen to strongly support the passage of the current draft.

Why are journalists more interested in publishing articles about TPP further away from the vote?

We're discussing TFA, which is already published. There are other reports and analyses out now as well.

You're claiming here that the New York Times was bought off with early access to TPP?

Your perseverance in this article's comments is something else, kudos.

That's an extreme interpretation. KAB started the thread with thoughts about "how the TTP is framed". I mentioned "lend[ing] a friendly ear". How did we move from that to "bought off"?

It's not as though NYT are infallible, however, and it is well known that journalists often become sympathetic to the opinions of those government officials, company executives, etc. to whom they require access in order to obtain information they need.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com