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

51–60 of 87 posts

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

#51

Post by bluntfang »

tossmeout wrote: post #11
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…

I fail to see how any of the quotes you provided are nasty or lack self-awareness.

(capital M, T) Me Too

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

#52

Post by wnevets »

cameronbrown wrote: post #8
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

It's required because a democratic society relies on a healthy press. These are supposed to be scholars, with a code of ethics, dedicated to documentation. Journalists are not supposed to actually interfere in the system they are observing (e.g. by calling for de-platforming) because then they go from being journalists to being activists. Edit: To be clear, I have no problem with newspapers including opinion articles…

Based on what? Journalism has always been through the lens of the author and/or organization. Not every form of journalism is meant to be the AP news.

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

#53

Post by bluntfang »

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.

So as long as you do bad shit and get away with it for 15 years no one should judge you for it?

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

#54

Post by karlakush »

gonehome wrote: post #12

This article is missing some of the critical context that lead to this from Twitter. Summarized here: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-July-2020-Twitter-spat-bet... I think Taylor comes across extremely negatively here and the spin in this Vice article just makes it worse. Basically Taylor puts up a mean tweet about the Away CEO’s comments on the media (without actually engaging in the content of those comments). Ba…

The fact that an anonymous quora user is a better journalist than a professional writer at Vice says a lot about the quality of modern journalism. Clicks are more important than accuracy and truth nowadays.

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

#55

Post by pmorici »

bluntfang wrote: post #53
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.

So as long as you do bad shit and get away with it for 15 years no one should judge you for it?

Not what the OP said. Even the US constitution recognizes that Ex post facto laws are bad and specifically prohibits their passage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law#United_State...

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

#57

Post by Pils »

gonehome wrote: post #12

This article is missing some of the critical context that lead to this from Twitter. Summarized here: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-July-2020-Twitter-spat-bet... I think Taylor comes across extremely negatively here and the spin in this Vice article just makes it worse. Basically Taylor puts up a mean tweet about the Away CEO’s comments on the media (without actually engaging in the content of those comments). Ba…

The Quora piece contains a lot of conjecture on the part of the author, who clearly has an ax to grind with the media. If you don't believe the conspiracy that "the Verge media outlet is specifically targeting female founders" the argument completely falls apart.

If you read the original Away article, Korey clearly crossed multiple lines and was creating a toxic work environment. As a tech worker, I think its right and good for people covering tech to "call out" this sort of revisionist history.

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

#58

Post by partdavid »

product50 wrote: post #23

If ever there was a one sided article, it was this. Doesn't even talk about the nuances of the problems. Journalists are like how dare tech people are criticizing us - but it is totally ok to do it the other way round. The difference now though is, because of social media, prominent tech personalities have much bigger audiences. Sometimes I am thankful like services like Twitter and Facebook exists since these types…

Yeah, I even started reading this one with an uncritical eye but the resentment just seeps through. There's even an aside where the author just has to provide this parenthetical counterargument to the accusation that journalists seek clicks... right there in a supposed news story, a whole paragraph of editorial argument.

It really wasn't very useful even to tease out whatever issues were supposedly being discussed.

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

#59

Post by gonehome »

Pils wrote: post #57
gonehome wrote: post #12

This article is missing some of the critical context that lead to this from Twitter. Summarized here: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-July-2020-Twitter-spat-bet... I think Taylor comes across extremely negatively here and the spin in this Vice article just makes it worse. Basically Taylor puts up a mean tweet about the Away CEO’s comments on the media (without actually engaging in the content of those comments). Ba…

The Quora piece contains a lot of conjecture on the part of the author, who clearly has an ax to grind with the media. If you don't believe the conspiracy that "the Verge media outlet is specifically targeting female founders" the argument completely falls apart. If you read the original Away article, Korey clearly crossed multiple lines and was creating a toxic work environment. As a tech worker, I think its right a…

I don’t disagree that the original Away article showed bad behavior.

Both things can be true though, the slack messages/toxic environment from Korey in that first article can be bad and it can be wrong for Taylor to mean tweet without addressing the content of any of Korey’s points about the media (which are valid), and everything Lorenz did to escalate and mislead from there can be wrong too.

For clarity the media comments Korey wrote that kicked this recent thing off are separate from that original article.

I have even less confidence that the original Away article is entirely true now given the journalist behavior around this second issue.

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

#60

Post by s1artibartfast »

This article is a great example of the phenomenon being discussed. The article intentionally misleads the reader and distorts statements. For example, look at the selective omission from Nait Jones statement. They were clearly trying to portray him as categorically opposed to journalists reporting on abuse.

>"When it comes to our industry, there’s a really, really toxic dynamic that exists right now,"

Next sentence omitted: There were very very impactfull stories about abuse inside fast growing tech companies, that proved to be very valuable stories, that stopped that abuse from happening.

>"Because those stories were so popular and drove so much traffic, they also created a market for more of those stories. They created a pressure on many reporters to find the next one of those stories inside of a fast growing tech company because those stories play very well on Twitter, especially around protecting vulnerable people."

Post reply on HN