It fundamentally is not media bias or suppression. The court has ordered that the documents not be released, pending litigation. The leak itself is illegitimate - the publication of the leak is maybe not.
The reason for it not being released is detailed in court documents. It's not a permanent decision, just one pending the outcome of litigation that has already been filed.
Now, maybe reddit is being dodgy, but at the same time they do have a legal argument to follow that judgment. Publishing the illegitimate leak is itself dubious. That's why it was done on Musk's X platform, the place circling the drain due to debt from a leveraged buyout, where right wing extermists can freely experiment with what they can get away with.
I'll say it again, even in spite of the court order, publishing the journal serves no real public interest. I challenge you to explain how publishing it right now does.
School shootings are not about left wing or right wing. It's about people whose lives are fucked up wanting to fuck other people up before they leave this world. If you stepped out of the US right wing bubble you might see that there is plenty of opportunity for a much brighter world. Instead, you seem to be focused on saying "See! Other people do it too!" rather than addressing the core problem of people doing it in the first place.
This shooting happened 8 months ago. The shooter has been dead for 8 months. It's been known that they were trans for 8 months, it's been known that they were left wing for 8 months, it's been known that they were extreme for 8 months. 8 months later, this is story is a storm in a teacup, one that has been exaggerated and does not give the full context. This isn't a manifesto, it's 3 pages curated out of a ranting journal.
If the shooter were right wing, it would still be just as likely that the court would restrict the release of the journal, on behalf of the children still attending the school, pending litigation.
I'm telling you with a straight face that it doesn't matter whether they were left or right, they're still full of shit.
Maybe, in an academic setting, it might have value to analyse their writings. So we can study how they devolved into madness. Such a study will come much later - but reactionary bullshit like this really isn't beneficial.
I mean, the whole story when it broke was massively over-exaggerated. "A trans person went on a school shooting, OMG TRANS PEOPLE ARE EVIL!" was the narrative. That's not rational, that's just sensationalism. This leak isn't about serving the public good, it's about stoking more of the same sensationalism.
Gun crime in all forms is bad. Focus on the gun crime, don't idolise the villains.
In any case, by the law, it was not supposed to be released yet. People sued to have it released, it shouldn't be released until after those lawsuits are resolved. Furthermore, the reason it was ordered not to be released was for the benefit of the families of children who went to the school.
Also, calling it a "manifesto" is such bullshit. It's 3 select pages of a journal full of mind vomit rants. That's not a manifesto, which is something far more coherent and fully fleshed out.
Damning in what way? It's already certain that they were guilty. The rantings and ravings from 3 select pages of a journal don't really do any credit to anything.
A court has ordered that it not be published, pending litigation. The places that have published it have done so on very dubious legal grounds.
Free speech has limits - you can't shout "fire" in a crowded theatre - and free press has similar limits. The public interest should be first and foremost, not ratings or clicks.
Non-Google AMP link: https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/audrey-hale-manifesto/
If you see "amp" in the link, delete it.
and said that they would have done more if possible.
This there is the MO I was talking about.
I can't conclusively say whether or not LinkedIn intentionally sold my email, or whether they were just infected at the time. However, I feel like the former is at least as feasible, and even if it was the latter it's still reprehensible of them to be so lax in their security. Like I say, I've only experienced 2 websites that did that, and I've made up countless emails going on for years before then.
Nope, at one point I created a LinkedIn account and my email address immediately started getting spam.
I use unique emails for things. Technically, the emails don't even exist, but I have a rule that any email that doesn't exist will be forwarded to my actual account. So the made up email I used for LinkedIn was unique and had only ever been typed into the LinkedIn service.
I've been doing this for a while, and generally most things don't seem to lose your email. There have been a few that were probably compromised, they were safe for a while then one day they were lost - this is more likely a malicious actor accessing the website's database. However LinkedIn is one of only 2 websites I've signed up for that have instantly resulted in spam - the other was a porn website.
LinkedIn have always been shady as fuck. When they first started out, they convinced everyone to input their email login details. LinkedIn would then access your email account and send emails to all your contacts asking them to join - all coming directly from your email address, not theirs. That was how LinkedIn built its market share. Back in the MSN Messenger days, LinkedIn emails were pretty notorious, but also everyone was pretty carefree online. They were perhaps one of the first services to demonstrate that you really should be careful what you share online, even if it is a "legitimate" service. Not everyone learned that lesson.
The compromised email thing happend some time after the MSN Messenger days, and I admit that I was one of those gullible baffoons who fell for the login thing initially (I've had 3 LinkedIn accounts, my first, then the second which was unique but instantly spammed, then my current). I think the porn website was more or less around the same time as well, so it is possible that LinkedIn was compromised as well as the porn site, such that anyone who signed up for either service (and maybe some others) would instantly get added to a spam list - not by the service but by the malicious infection. However, it certainly would fit their MO for LinkedIn to just sell email addresses directly.
Nowadays, I do get emails to my current LinkedIn account email that clearly should not have been shared. These tend to be more focused on the industry I work in, instead of generic spam. Recruiters almost always contact me via messages.
Don't give LinkedIn any more information than you have to. In particular, I would encourage users to share their CV's off platform.
Ahah! I knew the sales were pointing to some sort of new version incoming.