The road to truth: Those who say what most people think attract more attention, especially in the language of the street and the café
Translated from Croatian and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- The commentary argues that journalists should be able to use blunt terms for alleged thieves without waiting for a court ruling.
- It compares anonymous social-media commenters with members of parliament who receive protection through parliamentary immunity.
A journalist does not need a court decision to call a thief a thief, the commentary argues.
It questions whether politicians should wait for a final court ruling before using harsh terms to describe people linked in any way to an opposing political camp. The piece says there is no difference between the views expressed anonymously by users under pseudonyms on social media and those expressed by lawmakers protected by parliamentary immunity.
Originally published by Večernji List in Croatian. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.