Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 87 posts

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#41

Post by TimTheTinker »

catalogia wrote: post #29
TimTheTinker wrote: post #19

The writer of this article is a journalist , so the portrayal may be less than fair. That being said, and speaking generally (not about VCs or rich people in particular), something is going terribly wrong when a private person can be publicly shamed in the press 15 years from now for doing something that is completely normal and socially acceptable today , and lose their job as a result.

> a private person can be publicly shamed in the press 15 years from now for doing something that is completely normal and socially acceptable today This industry created the tools which made it feasible. Before social media, most people simply didn't have a public record of things they said years ago. This industry also created the platforms on which this sort of behavior flourishes. Journalists may have some bad ha…

Good point. But it takes a journalist with a specific purpose in mind, and a public that cares to be outraged in the first place about private people whose specific past behaviors have no bearing on history, to dig back into the past and bring such stuff out into the public eye, with specific names and dates attached.

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#43

Post by dsfdsfsdfasd »

tqi wrote: post #15

One thing I noticed when browsing the twitter thread where Taylor Lorenz tweeted about Balaji Srinivasan was the consistency of responses. Every single response from a verified journalist defended Lorenz and condemned the Srinivasan tweet, and every single response from a tech person defended Srinivasan and pointed to Lorenzs own tweet about Stephanie Korey. As far as I saw, neither side engaged with the other's argu…

The fact that they arent even aware of the contradiction of saying that it's journalists who have too much power while complaining that someone is powerless because they don't have a lot of social media followers or that journalists are driven by the need to go viral on social media is scary to say the least.

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#44

Post by protomyth »

askafriend wrote: post #21
encoderer wrote: post #14

Every VC nerd tweeting about Clubhouse reminds me of the Robert Scoble influencer strategy for the Google Glass.

This is one of the best takes I've seen. Ahh....Scoble....I remember those days.

I think the peek was an episode essentially about cut-and-paste and on the web which had something to do with Ray Ozzie on the Gilmore Gang.

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#45

Post by s1artibartfast »

ciarannolan wrote: post #6

> On Wednesday night, the topic of conversation was Lorenz herself, who had been listening earlier in the conversation but left partway through. After she left, the participants began discussing whether Lorenz was playing "the woman card" when speaking out about her harassment following a Twitter altercation with Srinivasan. > "You can't fucking hit somebody, attack them and just say, 'Hey, I have ovaries and therefo…

Do you mean the lack of self awareness on the part of Vice? I thought the third quote could have been something out of The Onion.

Breaking news! VCs disparage outrage driven click bait. Click to read more...

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#46

Post by Pils »

tqi wrote: post #15

One thing I noticed when browsing the twitter thread where Taylor Lorenz tweeted about Balaji Srinivasan was the consistency of responses. Every single response from a verified journalist defended Lorenz and condemned the Srinivasan tweet, and every single response from a tech person defended Srinivasan and pointed to Lorenzs own tweet about Stephanie Korey. As far as I saw, neither side engaged with the other's argu…

I didn't really see that. For example, DHH was extremely critical of Balaji's shenanigans. It seemed like rationalist twitter (most likely due to the anti-NYT sentiment relating to the SSC drama) + some VCs vs the rest of Online Twitter. Taylor's beat is usually of the more liminal variety rather than red meat, culture war content, so this whole situation feels like the result of misplaced animosity.

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#47

Post by wnevets »

oddlyamused wrote: post #10
wnevets wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, I would argue that journalists don't understand that their role requires objectivity Based on what? Objectivity hasn't been required since the printing press was invented

Ethics are rarely required but that does not lessen their importance. Are you argueing against having ethics in journalism simply because they were not required when the printing press was invented?

That's quite the leap you made there. Have you stopped beating your wife?

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#48

Post by rexreed »

ciarannolan wrote: post #6

> On Wednesday night, the topic of conversation was Lorenz herself, who had been listening earlier in the conversation but left partway through. After she left, the participants began discussing whether Lorenz was playing "the woman card" when speaking out about her harassment following a Twitter altercation with Srinivasan. > "You can't fucking hit somebody, attack them and just say, 'Hey, I have ovaries and therefo…

In Silicon Valley, this is how it's always been. Just hidden. It's like this in the finance industry as a whole as well.

Re: Silicon Valley Elite Discuss Journalists Having Too Much Power in Private App

#49

Post by rdiddly »

Dumb piece about a dumb conversation. But for the record, journalists gain trust & responsibility by keeping their opinions out of it. If you give free rein to your silly opinions, all you do is gain the blind obedience of those who already agree with you, which is easy. Easy. And is the default mode on Twitter, i.e. the "mooks and knights" model - https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2020/01/16/the-internet-of-beefs/

Those who want to be treated with respect like real grown-up journalists need to act like real grown-up journalists and not just common Twitter trash. What am I supposed to do with something like "Silicon Valley millionaires, who have been coddled..."? If I'm looking to be outraged and join a mob, I'm all good, I've reached my destination. If on the other hand I'm looking for facts/journalism, what should I do at this point? Ask for a source? Where was the coddling? Who did the coddling? What kind of coddling? When did this coddling take place? Just asking the usual 5-6 journalistic questions about it makes you realize how fucking tedious this particular bit of "news" is. It's actually not news, not a fact. It's a mean-spirited, trashy little aside. (Does this automatically mean I support "millionaires" exploiting and demeaning others? No, you idiot.)

Want a grim laugh? Picture Hitler ranting & raving at a podium, and that sentence appearing as the subtitle. "THEY HAVE BEEN CODDLED AND WILL BE CODDLED NO MORE!!!" crowd: "Heeeiiill!" Hitler was not a journalist.

All the little side commentary (I'm already too bored to cite other examples but it does get worse from there) sounds like something out of Idiocracy. Flagging this for being intellectually beneath us.

Post reply on HN