[stared]

It doesn't matter if anyones favorite or hated.

Breaking trust, going against wished how people prefer to be addressed and endangering people for now good reason - well, it's at most style of irresponsible, tabloid-level journalism.

If NYT aims for tabloid level standard, indeed, the journalist was doing his job.

[catacombs]

> Breaking trust, going against wished how people prefer to be addressed and endangering people for now good reason - well, it's at most style of irresponsible, tabloid-level journalism.

Did you read SSC's post? SSC didn't mention anything of a "promise" or "agreement" for the reporter to not use his name. The reporter found it another way.

Now, if SSC explicitly said the reporter promised not to use his name, then that opens a new can of worms.

[stared]

Doxxing is not something new. Scott Alexander is clear about his anonymity.

If a journalist interviewed a popular camgirl who introduced herself as (say) LustyClaraXXX, and then "did research" to compare pictures, and revealed her legal name an occupation (say, a schoolteacher), would you consider it ethical?

If yes, why so? If no, why so?

[catacombs]

> If a journalist interviewed a popular camgirl who introduced herself as (say) LustyClaraXXX, and then "did research" to compare pictures, and revealed her legal name an occupation (say, a schoolteacher), would you consider it ethical?

It really depends on the context of the story, with additional nuances that a competent editor must consider:

Is this camgirl the central figure of this story?

What are her reasons for not revealing her real name?

You say she is a school teacher. What kind of teacher? Is she a well-known professor? Is she someone who teaches kindergarten?

Does she make more money from camming than being a teacher? That in itself could be another story about the system.

And on and on and on.

[AftHurrahWinch]

Journalists shouldn't print anonymous articles. Journalists should use anonymous sources as little as possible.

"Tabloid level" journalism is how I would describe stories full of anonymous sources.

[catacombs]

> Journalists shouldn't print anonymous articles. Journalists should use anonymous sources as little as possible.

Correct. But there are times when anonymous sources are necessary. Look at WaPo and NYT's political coverage. They use many political insiders who can't go on the record but reveal necessary information for the public.

One example: Trump's "shit hole countries" comment. That came from anonymous sources who were in the room, backed up with a few on-the-record commends from outsiders.