No Thank You, Mr. Pecker • Hacker News Board

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#151

Post by mynameisvlad » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:23 AM UTC

matt4077 wrote: post #64

hypochondria wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that this is a great example. The scandal was already out. His wife was already leaving him. The public already knows and already assumed lurid exploits. The rest is just details. It would be different if the decision to publicize this extortion attempt had been what caused his divorce.

It’s really not a scandal to split up with your wife. Or to have sex. That Pecker and his ilk seem to think it is, is the reason they misjudged this situation so fatally.

I mean, AMI does publish basically all the gossip-filled tabloids and magazines, so to them, it is the hot new scandal of the year.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#152

Post by tptacek » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:24 AM UTC

radicaldreamer wrote: post #55

Wonder what the Saudi connection is...

The Post, along with the Times, has been pursuing and reporting a story that David Pecker, AMI's CEO, has been working with a Saudi go-between, in part as an effort to expand their business. More importantly, Jamal Khashoggi, who we now know almost beyond a reasonable doubt† was targeted by Mohammad Bin Salman before Saudi assassins murdered him in Turkey (most probably at MBS's behest), was a Post employee.

† Reports emerged today that there's apparently audio of MBS himself ruminating over having him murdered.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#153

Post by seanwilson » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:25 AM UTC

I'm impressed he didn't censor out the text that says what the photos contain. The post would have had a similar impact either way I think. Nobody should have to be embarrassed about harm-free personal activities though.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#154

Post by darkpuma » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:25 AM UTC

woodruffw wrote: post #11

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Important note: This is written by Jeff Bezos himself . Normally, the Bezos affair story would be gossipy, but this alleges extortion , extraordinarily. (Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.)

> (Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.) Using his stake in the WaPo to boost a personal rebuttal would be a tremendous ethical lapse.

Serious question: What if he bought a full page ad at the market rate? Would that be unethical because he was paying himself (sort of) for that ad?

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#155

Post by darkpuma » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:29 AM UTC

unreal37 wrote: post #93

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: this is likely how a sterile robot would respond to an extortion attempt.

Sterile robots don't have naked selfies floating around.

It's only a matter of time before they implement that feature.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#156

Post by hbosch » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:30 AM UTC

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Important note: This is written by Jeff Bezos himself . Normally, the Bezos affair story would be gossipy, but this alleges extortion , extraordinarily. (Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.)

Personal stuff is for blogs. The Washington Post is a business, a respected newspaper, an internationally renowned journalistic publication. It’s not a soapbox for Bezos...

In fact, why not bring up that he owns one of the most heavily trafficked websites on the planet. Why didn’t he publish this letter to Amazon.com front page? Equally valid question, no?

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#157

Post by wp381640 » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:31 AM UTC

theNJR wrote: post #29

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Important note: This is written by Jeff Bezos himself . Normally, the Bezos affair story would be gossipy, but this alleges extortion , extraordinarily. (Also, why is Jeff Bezos using Medium? He owns a newspaper.)

Also interesting that the writing is a bit clunky. Doesn't seem to have gone through 100 coms people.

apparently his lawyers didn't even know he was posting

it does come across as quickly written and rather genuine

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#158

Post by 3pt14159 » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:33 AM UTC

rblion wrote: post #53

I respect him even more now. We are all human. Nobody wins this 'moral crusade' that takes up so much airtime. We should be much more focused on the existential threats that the entire biosphere is dealing with, not the 'dick pics' of the world's richest man. He's just another dude at his core it seems, happens to be founder of Amazon though.

[flagged]

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#159

Post by monkeydreams » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:34 AM UTC

function_seven wrote: post #118

monkeydreams wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. One thought did occur to me is that he is basically daring AMI to release the pictures. What if he knows the providence of these pictures, knows how they got into AMI hands, and knows that if AMI publish them he can sue them, Gawker (not Buzzfeed) style, into the ground?

Gawker style?

Lol. That's embarrassing.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#160

Post by philwelch » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 1:43 AM UTC

stupidcar wrote: post #42

minimaxir wrote: post #18

Granted, this strategy is very high risk unless you're one of the richest people in the world.

The problem I have with most super rich people is that they consider genuine risk far less important than potential embarrassment. E.g. they won't dare taking a stand politically because of the chance that someone will go public with some scandalous nonsense. Bezos on the other hand seems willing to calculate differently. I have to say, this has changed my opinion of him a lot in his favour. On the very remote chance…

Jeff Bezos has mentioned before that he tries to make big decisions from a “regret minimization framework”.