Oh no! Those innocent salespeople! How terrible that Ukraine might harm a civilian livelihood in any way! What heinous acts those Ukrainians have committed! Not like the Russians, who have only...
The recent strikes have impacted hundreds of sellers whose livelihoods depend on online marketplaces.
Oh no! Those innocent salespeople! How terrible that Ukraine might harm a civilian livelihood in any way! What heinous acts those Ukrainians have committed! Not like the Russians, who have only been bombing the Ukrainian civilian infrastructure for the last 4 years, killing and injuring hundreds and causing billions of dollars of infrastructure damage. Who will look out for the poor Russians?
I mean ... fair enough, but the context of that line is this: I think the point is that, the war is harming everyone, and the Russian civilian populace is not exempt? Admittedly, it looks like...
I mean ... fair enough, but the context of that line is this:
She said that "if there are more strikes, I probably won't manage. It's terrifying to keep loading my goods into what feels like a furnace".
"I am a mother of a disabled child, I've built the business myself", wrote another trader, in post that has gone viral on social media.
"I've lost one million roubles (£9,500; $12,730) and it's just my problem now. I'm out of strength. We're already getting screwed over from every direction as it is," she wrote.
I think the point is that, the war is harming everyone, and the Russian civilian populace is not exempt? Admittedly, it looks like most of them barely have an opinion on the attempted annexation and ongoing war in Ukraine.
I dunno, I still feel a pang of empathy for those folks affected. Similarly, I certainly don't cheer on ICE murdering Americans, while their country kills thousands of Iranians and causes billions of dollars in damage. As someone who lives in a country being directly threatened by Americans on the regular, do you figure it moral for me to flip in my convictions and start rooting for a civil war to wipe 'em all out?
I feel bad for all the people affected by injustice and war. It's rare that the people hurt in war are people who have any power over the situation. Does it suck to have invested money in a...
I feel bad for all the people affected by injustice and war. It's rare that the people hurt in war are people who have any power over the situation. Does it suck to have invested money in a business and lose that money because of something outside of your control? Absolutely. The war is harming many people, but the harms experienced are disproportionately on the Ukrainian side. Including humanizing anecdotes regarding the civilians on the aggressor's side of a war isn't a neutral publishing choice, but that individual woman is basically faultless.
OK ... sorry, not sure how to respond, or what you're attempting to convey. Sure, agreed that it isn't a neutral publishing choice. The moment a reporter types a word into the document editor --...
OK ... sorry, not sure how to respond, or what you're attempting to convey.
Including humanizing anecdotes regarding the civilians on the aggressor's side of a war isn't a neutral publishing choice, but that individual woman is basically faultless.
Sure, agreed that it isn't a neutral publishing choice. The moment a reporter types a word into the document editor -- or even, gets a concept approved for publication -- bias is introduced. My claim is that the bias is: "humanize the population, so that we don't promote racist views on entire populations". I haven't seen much from the BBC which makes me think it has the same editorial bents as e.g. Fox News or Breitbart, but maybe I'm not up to date.
It'd be nice if reporting encouraged people to remember that this is Putin's war against the people of Ukraine, not a 1 v 1 cage match between individual Ukranians and the pure evil, conniving, dastardly Russians (for whom no pity or empathy should be reserved). Which some subset of people seem to tend to fall back onto without constant prodding to remember the human. So I'm in favour of it, at least, until it gets egregious.
You know, fair enough. I just worry that nuanced narratives of suffering on both sides will make people who do feel empathy try to get the fighting to stop as soon as possible, rather than with a...
You know, fair enough. I just worry that nuanced narratives of suffering on both sides will make people who do feel empathy try to get the fighting to stop as soon as possible, rather than with a positive outcome that preserves Ukrainian territorial integrity and independence.
I hope most people feel empathy, but as someone who experiences rather an excess of it, my care and compassion for innocents harmed does not blind me to the realities of the situation. And even...
I hope most people feel empathy, but as someone who experiences rather an excess of it, my care and compassion for innocents harmed does not blind me to the realities of the situation. And even though I do wish for an end to the war, I know the only immediate solution would be total capitulation. And that would not stop the harm either.
Maybe if I had magic powers I'd come to a different conclusion.
That line stood out to me as well and I don't know why it's written. Who is it for? Drumming up support for Russians? Inflammatory clickbait? Concern trolling? Signaling? Ok, a couple of sellers...
That line stood out to me as well and I don't know why it's written. Who is it for? Drumming up support for Russians? Inflammatory clickbait? Concern trolling? Signaling?
Ok, a couple of sellers will have a rough time. Sad, I guess, but it pales to the wholesale destruction of livelihoods that happened and is happening within Ukraine.
It's called journalism. Reporting the news is about telling people what happened, even when it's an awkward fit for the narrative one might have started out with. Even if it seems justified (and I...
It's called journalism. Reporting the news is about telling people what happened, even when it's an awkward fit for the narrative one might have started out with.
Even if it seems justified (and I think it probably is), the reader should know the consequences of Ukraine blowing up these warehouses. It's a war. Bombings have victims. Also, the stuff they blew up belonged to someone. Let's not sweep it under the rug.
Apparently we are so accustomed to journalists broadly hinting about what we should believe that we get confused when occasionally a journalist leaves it up to their readers to decide for themselves what to do with the information?
No news article contains all of the information about an event. Every piece of media includes editorial choices, and those aren't neutral. A journalist "leaving it up to the readers to decide" is...
No news article contains all of the information about an event. Every piece of media includes editorial choices, and those aren't neutral. A journalist "leaving it up to the readers to decide" is still choosing a selection of information for the readers to use to make their decision, and that choice isn't a neutral fact of the world. It may look neutral, and is absolutely not.
Well, yes, that's true too. It's journalistic choices all the way down. But I appreciate it when when we're not being told what to think, or not explicitly anyway. That's also a choice a writer...
Well, yes, that's true too. It's journalistic choices all the way down. But I appreciate it when when we're not being told what to think, or not explicitly anyway. That's also a choice a writer could make, to leave things in when they don't seem to fit.
Ukrainian drones have hit warehouses belonging to Russia's biggest online retailer again, injuring 15 people, according to the company's founder and regional governors.
[...]
It is the second time Ukraine has attacked the firm's facilities in four days, with warehouses in Tambov and Elektrostal hit over the weekend, killing eight people.
[...]
Reports of the strikes first emerged just after 00:00 GMT, with the Russian state news agency TASS reporting that air defences had been activated in Nevinnomyssk. Dramatic footage filmed by locals began to emerge shortly after.
In both locations, the impact appears substantial, with large fires engulfing the buildings and huge columns of smoke rising into the air.
[...]
Serhii Kuzan, chairman of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Centre, previously told the BBC that Wildberries' website had been used by Russian volunteers to buy military equipment.
"The primary rationale for striking Wildberries' warehouses is to disrupt Russian logistics and the supply of dual-use goods, critical electronics, sanctioned goods and the like to the Russian army and Russian arms manufacturers," he said.
[...]
Unlike retail giant Amazon, Wildberries and its rival Ozon act almost entirely as marketplaces, connecting independent sellers with buyers across Russia, storing and delivering their goods, and handling payments.
The recent strikes have impacted hundreds of sellers whose livelihoods depend on online marketplaces.
Oh no! Those innocent salespeople! How terrible that Ukraine might harm a civilian livelihood in any way! What heinous acts those Ukrainians have committed! Not like the Russians, who have only been bombing the Ukrainian civilian infrastructure for the last 4 years, killing and injuring hundreds and causing billions of dollars of infrastructure damage. Who will look out for the poor Russians?
I mean ... fair enough, but the context of that line is this:
I think the point is that, the war is harming everyone, and the Russian civilian populace is not exempt? Admittedly, it looks like most of them barely have an opinion on the attempted annexation and ongoing war in Ukraine.
I dunno, I still feel a pang of empathy for those folks affected. Similarly, I certainly don't cheer on ICE murdering Americans, while their country kills thousands of Iranians and causes billions of dollars in damage. As someone who lives in a country being directly threatened by Americans on the regular, do you figure it moral for me to flip in my convictions and start rooting for a civil war to wipe 'em all out?
I feel bad for all the people affected by injustice and war. It's rare that the people hurt in war are people who have any power over the situation. Does it suck to have invested money in a business and lose that money because of something outside of your control? Absolutely. The war is harming many people, but the harms experienced are disproportionately on the Ukrainian side. Including humanizing anecdotes regarding the civilians on the aggressor's side of a war isn't a neutral publishing choice, but that individual woman is basically faultless.
OK ... sorry, not sure how to respond, or what you're attempting to convey.
Sure, agreed that it isn't a neutral publishing choice. The moment a reporter types a word into the document editor -- or even, gets a concept approved for publication -- bias is introduced. My claim is that the bias is: "humanize the population, so that we don't promote racist views on entire populations". I haven't seen much from the BBC which makes me think it has the same editorial bents as e.g. Fox News or Breitbart, but maybe I'm not up to date.
It'd be nice if reporting encouraged people to remember that this is Putin's war against the people of Ukraine, not a 1 v 1 cage match between individual Ukranians and the pure evil, conniving, dastardly Russians (for whom no pity or empathy should be reserved). Which some subset of people seem to tend to fall back onto without constant prodding to remember the human. So I'm in favour of it, at least, until it gets egregious.
You know, fair enough. I just worry that nuanced narratives of suffering on both sides will make people who do feel empathy try to get the fighting to stop as soon as possible, rather than with a positive outcome that preserves Ukrainian territorial integrity and independence.
I hope most people feel empathy, but as someone who experiences rather an excess of it, my care and compassion for innocents harmed does not blind me to the realities of the situation. And even though I do wish for an end to the war, I know the only immediate solution would be total capitulation. And that would not stop the harm either.
Maybe if I had magic powers I'd come to a different conclusion.
That line stood out to me as well and I don't know why it's written. Who is it for? Drumming up support for Russians? Inflammatory clickbait? Concern trolling? Signaling?
Ok, a couple of sellers will have a rough time. Sad, I guess, but it pales to the wholesale destruction of livelihoods that happened and is happening within Ukraine.
It's called journalism. Reporting the news is about telling people what happened, even when it's an awkward fit for the narrative one might have started out with.
Even if it seems justified (and I think it probably is), the reader should know the consequences of Ukraine blowing up these warehouses. It's a war. Bombings have victims. Also, the stuff they blew up belonged to someone. Let's not sweep it under the rug.
Apparently we are so accustomed to journalists broadly hinting about what we should believe that we get confused when occasionally a journalist leaves it up to their readers to decide for themselves what to do with the information?
No news article contains all of the information about an event. Every piece of media includes editorial choices, and those aren't neutral. A journalist "leaving it up to the readers to decide" is still choosing a selection of information for the readers to use to make their decision, and that choice isn't a neutral fact of the world. It may look neutral, and is absolutely not.
Well, yes, that's true too. It's journalistic choices all the way down. But I appreciate it when when we're not being told what to think, or not explicitly anyway. That's also a choice a writer could make, to leave things in when they don't seem to fit.
From the article:
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]