Aisha Down
LightNews LightNews
aishadown.bsky.social
Aisha Down
@aishadown.bsky.social
40 followers 18 following 3 posts
Reporter covering AI for The Guardian. Senior Tarbell Fellow @ Tarbell Center for AI Journalism. SABEW award for international reporting, 2024.
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Aisha Down
chronotope.aramzs.xyz
This, unfortunately, has been very obviously coming. I suspect this is only the leading edge of a whole bounty hunter complex.

aramzs.xyz/noteworthy/t...
December 23, 2025 at 8:49 PM
Reposted by Aisha Down
annabower.bsky.social
“These men risked their lives to speak with us. We have a moral and professional obligation to the sources who entrusted us with their
stories. Abandoning them now is a betrayal of the most basic tenet of journalism: giving voice to the voiceless.”
annabower.bsky.social Anna Bower @annabower.bsky.social · 2d
Per NY Times’s Michael Grynbaum on X, this is Sharyn Alfonsi’s email to her “60 Minutes” colleagues in full:
News Team, Thank you for the notes and texts. I apologize for not reaching out earlier. I learned on Saturday that Bari Weiss spiked our story, INSIDE CECOT, which was supposed to air tonight. We (Ori and I) asked for a call to discuss her decision. She did not afford us that courtesy/opportunity. Our story was screened five times and cleared by both CBS attorneys and Standards and Practices. It is factually correct. In my view, pulling it now-after every rigorous internal check has been met is not an editorial decision, it is a political one. We requested responses to questions and/or interviews with DHS, the White House, and the State Department. Government silence is a statement, not a VETO. Their refusal to be interviewed is a tactical maneuver designed to kill the story. If the administration's refusal to participate becomes a valid reason to spike a story, we have effectively handed them a "kill switch" for any reporting they find inconvenient. If the standard for airing a story becomes "the government must agree to be interviewed," then the government effectively gains control over the 60 Minutes broadcast. We go from an investigative powerhouse to a stenographer for the state. These men risked their lives to speak with us. We have a moral and professional obligation to the sources who entrusted us with their stories. Abandoning them now is a betrayal of the most basic tenet of journalism: giving voice to the voiceless. CBS spiked the Jeffrey Wigand interview due to legal concerns, nearly destroying the credibility of this broadcast. It took years to recover from that "low point." By pulling this story to shield an administration, we are repeating that history, but for political optics rather than legal ones. We have been promoting this story on social media for days. Our viewers are expecting it. When it fails to air without a credible explanation, the public will correctly identify this as corporate censorship. We are trading 50 years of "Gold Standard" reputation for a single week of political quiet. I care too much about this broadcast to watch it be dismantled without a fight. Sharyn
December 22, 2025 at 3:42 AM
aishadown.bsky.social
“If we handed in stuff that was AI-generated, we would be kicked out of the uni, but we’re being taught by an AI" -- on how maybe AI shouldn't transform higher education.

www.theguardian.com/education/20...
‘We could have asked ChatGPT’: students fight back over course taught by AI
Staffordshire students say signs material was AI-generated included suspicious file names and rogue voiceover accent
www.theguardian.com
November 20, 2025 at 8:54 PM
aishadown.bsky.social
Ross Douthat here makes a fantastic argument for ... just subscribing to The Guardian instead.
November 8, 2025 at 10:27 AM
Reposted by Aisha Down
moiradonegan.bsky.social
If I was working at the Times (would never happen lol) I would be talking to my women colleagues and perhaps outside counsel about whether this constitutes a Title VII violation.
katebaldwin.bsky.social Kate Baldwin @katebaldwin.bsky.social · Nov 6
Current printed title (and better summary):
NYT headline “Did Women Ruin the Workplace?”
November 6, 2025 at 5:00 PM