Re: RMS and fresh censorship attempts

[Akira Urushibata]

I thank Mr. Jean Louis for taking the time to sort out the facts.

As I said in a previous post, I've seen several news articles claiming
that Richard Stallman "defended" Jeffrey Epstein.  Now a reputable
news outlet like Washington Post or Le Monde wouldn't write something
like that.  Richard Stallman is a public figure.  A decent media firm
would contact him and ask some questions:

  "Have you ever met Jeffrey Epstein?"
  "What is your impression of him?"
  "What do you think of the victims?"
  "Now what you've said so far contradicts what others, mainly women,
  are saying about you.  Why the difference?"
  "Do you have any evidence to support your claim?"

This is due procedure.  A news agency that prints material harmful to
someone's reputation without even trying to interview the person in
question is simply not doing its job.

I am saying this because we here have higher standards of professional
work.  I'm pretty sure some of us here have done work on communication
software that newspapers, magazines and TV companies use to publish
and disseminate their online versions.  Why should media which fails
to do basic fact-checks be allowed to have influence on society, over
and above us?  If this goes on, we will be disqualified even before we
open our mouths.

And why are multiple organizations (or representatives thereof) making
public statements at this moment?  They ought to be fully aware of the
nature of the news that is circulating right now.