Fine but you had to use alternative sources to get that information.
This particular piece is trash because it didn't go get those leaked documents and then discuss them in depth like the vice link. That is real investigative journalism. This linked piece speculated the entire way through.
This should be dropped from the front page and we should be discussing the vice or gizmodo article which actually put in the work to go through the allegations.
The linked article is an interview with the journalist who leaked the documents discussed in the Vice and Gizmodo articles. I think this story is intended to be a continuation of the discussion on the original story.
Okay that is not particularly clear to me from the article and it's doing a disservice to the overall discussion then, imo. They should at least be linking to the original articles then to give context on that fact.
The reason I went looking for the Vice article in the first place was due to what was said in the first paragraph of the article:
>According to documents, Amazon reportedly runs a surveillance program to track activism among its workers. NPR's Ari Shapiro talks with Lauren Gurley of Motherboard magazine, who broke the story.
I'll fully admit I gloss right over the names of journalists typically in favor of reading the content of the article, though had I read that I still would have had to search for the story much like you did. I can take two things away here, I should slow down when reading an article and this article should still be more obvious about the work they're discussing.
This particular piece is trash because it didn't go get those leaked documents and then discuss them in depth like the vice link. That is real investigative journalism. This linked piece speculated the entire way through.
This should be dropped from the front page and we should be discussing the vice or gizmodo article which actually put in the work to go through the allegations.