Washingtonian attacks journalist who broke bowser story

[Anonymous]

About her not wearing a mask. They say the journalist wasn’t invited https://twitter.com/washingtonian/status/1422252606601109509?s=21

[Anonymous]

1) I wouldn't classify this as "attacking."
2) Using the phrase "security blockaded the free press" to describe security keeping her away from a guest at a party she wasn't invited to is pretty funny.
3) I think the journalist was in the right here to crash the party and take video, and I guess someone who has the chutzpah to do that is also someone who would describe the subsequent events that way.

[Anonymous]

The Washington Times reporter is stretching the truth to a degree:

Meanwhile, the actual wedding:




The reporter didn't need to lie in her Tweet. But I guess she's in the business of selling clicks.

Of course, we get to real motivation of the reporter - self publicity:

[Anonymous]

This is not remotely an attack. This is reporting.

[Anonymous]

Why would her people at legs to this story by having it rehashed. Not smart in my book.

[Anonymous]

So is crashing a wedding supposed to be a grave sin now? Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Washington Times reporter is stretching the truth to a degree:

Meanwhile, the actual wedding:




The reporter didn't need to lie in her Tweet. But I guess she's in the business of selling clicks.

Of course, we get to real motivation of the reporter - self publicity:

Where is the lie?

[Anonymous]

A magazine attacked a journalist for doing journalism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A magazine attacked a journalist for doing journalism.

Yep. I love how trashed they are getting in their own replies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:



Where is the lie?

The Mayor did not “officiate an indoor wedding.” The ceremony is clearly outside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A magazine attacked a journalist for doing journalism.

To be clear, I'm fine with Bowser being outed. But could you please explain how a sentence noting that the reporter was not an invited wedding guest is an attack? It's a statement of fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



Where is the lie?

The Mayor did not “officiate an indoor wedding.” The ceremony is clearly outside.

I guess it depends how you define “wedding.” If someone tells me they are going to a wedding, I tend to think that includes the reception, not just the ceremony. In any case, it’s irrelevant to the issue of the mayor’s hypocrisy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A magazine attacked a journalist for doing journalism.

To be clear, I'm fine with Bowser being outed. But could you please explain how a sentence noting that the reporter was not an invited wedding guest is an attack? It's a statement of fact.

Who cares whether the journalist was invited? What’s the relevance?

[Anonymous]

She’s inside in one of the photos, acquiring the photos or even crashing imo if you don’t lie or anything to get in is definitely journalism.

[Anonymous]

Is the idea now that journalists should only report on events to which they receive an invitation? That’s ridiculous.