NY Times wrote an article describing the protection levels of congress, including at this very ballpark. Did they encourage today’s shooting?

The New York Times decided to write an article on the protection levels of the various people In government. I’m not sure this is very wise idea. And I’m not sure whom at the New York Times saw this as a wise idea. This New York Times article is on government protection services related to public officials in Washington.

New York Times article on government protection services related to public officials.

Laying out things like the protection levels of Senators and congressmen during practice for a baseball game. Various officials of government.

We are openly in a time where were fighting against an enemy that doesn’t wear military uniforms And yeah, we have decided it’s OK to publish this kind of information. Is the New York Times trying to cause someone to get injured? I’m not sure. I hope not.

When exactly did journalism no longer protect those they are writing about. When their articles could create problems for the people they are referencing; Journalistic integrity dictated we edited out for protections of those people. Sometimes it is required by law we do so. As a rule of thumb we try to protect those we sometimes seem to seek to destroy.

This reads like the reporter doesn’t believe that giving senator or presidential security details is not a compromiser of security.

Recently, we have seen articles in newspapers that give the names of underage children. Addresses of people and children that have been abused. Names of various victims with their address. Politicians family members and their phone numbers. It just seems the level of accurate and respectful and professional journalism has died in America.

With the advent of the Internet. Anyone can really be a journalist, even me. Anyone. The scariest part, in my 8th grade journalism class in JFK jr high school in Miami Florida, our teacher taught us about journalistic integrity. Could you prove a product does what it says. Can what you are writing cause harm to someone else? Do you open yourself up to litigation for a report? These questions are but some of the few journalists and editors should be asking as they proof read writing meant to be “published.”

So Honestly who on earth read this article and thought it was a good idea?