Throwaway to protect my sibling's identity (very very small town).
> Doesn't affect the legality of this raid, of course.
Do you see how the second statement undermines the first? "Yeah, but some people don't like the paper" isn't really an opposing side to the story, just sour grapes.
The raid might be legal or illegal. The people running the paper might be behaving unethically/illegally or ethically/legally. And if the people running the paper are committing crimes, that IS relevant to the legality of the raid. Not just sour grapes.
And perhaps those of us that live nearby have more information and perspective than random commenters on HN?
Can't you see how a article that waxes poetic about freedom of the press and ignores potential illegal/immoral behavior of the specific reporters might result in internet outrage that doesn't address the scope of the community's issues?
Doesn't seem likely, given what you've posted so far. Do you have anything of substance to contribute aside from the completely unsurprising information that the paper has enemies? Perhaps you could link to any of the unethical hit pieces you say the paper makes a habit of publishing. Or provide a plausible hypothesis for how identity theft and computer hacking could be crimes the paper's involved in committing. Because so far, it's pretty hard to construe this affair as the journalists being the bad guys and the cops being in the right, even if we account for the journalists in question being muckrakers.