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

61–70 of 87 posts

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

#61

Post by mc13 »

Pils wrote: post #46
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.

DHH has always been against the VC culture.

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

#62

Post by s1artibartfast »

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?

I think you missed a critical part of the post you are responding to.

>...for doing something that is completely normal and socially acceptable

The question has to do with the growing application of moral presentism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_histo...

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

#63

Post by bluntfang »

pmorici wrote: post #55
bluntfang wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

The law isn't social or corporate.

It's funny this community supports separation of politics and workplace until it could possibly effect them negatively. I don't care how long it's been since you were in the KKK or sexually harassed your EA even if it was "socially acceptable at the time", I don't ever want to work with you.

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

#64

Post by cameronbrown »

_jal wrote: post #25
cameronbrown wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You're asking for a state of affairs that had never existed. De-platforming/cancelling is the hip word at the moment, and powerful people are getting nervous, because it is the rabble instead of the powerful doing the canceling. I have two responses: (1) The amount of self-awareness demonstrated by the elites tends to be related to how they fair in peasant revolts. (2) People have short memories, the class-driven sta…

> People have short memories, the class-driven state of affairs you prefer will be back soon enough.

Are you sure? Can anyone be sure of this? The internet has fundamentally altered the dynamic with the new Gutenberg revolution. Now the angry mobs have louder voices than even the largest institutions. Worse, people at these institutions are encouraging the mob for clickbait driven profit.

The incentives are perverse and it's why a strong code of ethics is essential.

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

#65

Post by dragonwriter »

pmorici wrote: post #55
bluntfang wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

> Even the US constitution recognizes that Ex post facto laws are bad and specifically prohibits their passage.

Ex post facto is a term of art in criminal law; and the prohibition has everything to do with the type of consequences that are uniquely applied in the criminal context.

It does not reflect a general rule that there is no liability for wrongs determined after-the-fact, but is a special exception to the general rule that such liability is acceptable.

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

#66

Post by TimTheTinker »

bluntfang wrote: post #63
pmorici wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

The law isn't social or corporate. It's funny this community supports separation of politics and workplace until it could possibly effect them negatively. I don't care how long it's been since you were in the KKK or sexually harassed your EA even if it was "socially acceptable at the time", I don't ever want to work with you.

Journalism’s purpose is to report current and past events that have a bearing on history — both political and social.

You may not want to work with a former KKK member, but that doesn’t mean the press (or anyone) has any business exposing their sins in public, unless there are specific crimes for which penal justice has yet to be served—and even then, a wise journalist would do well to contact the DA instead of publishing first.

Beyond that, I would remark that “love your neighbor as yourself” does include personal and social forgiveness of past wrongs: “He who covers an offense promotes love.” But an unforgiving society is brittle and prone to collapse into totalitarianism.

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

#67

Post by zozbot234 »

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…

ISTM that the article is very explicitly taking sides; it doesn't even claim to be providing some neutral view of the controversy, it just advances the journalists' own point of view. A biased article will always get more clicks.

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

#68

Post by dragonwriter »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #66
bluntfang wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law isn't social or corporate. It's funny this community supports separation of politics and workplace until it could possibly effect them negatively. I don't care how long it's been since you were in the KKK or sexually harassed your EA even if it was "socially acceptable at the time", I don't ever want to work with you.

Journalism’s purpose is to report current and past events that have a bearing on history — both political and social. You may not want to work with a former KKK member, but that doesn’t mean the press (or anyone) has any business exposing their sins in public, unless there are specific crimes for which penal justice has yet to be served—and even then, a wise journalist would do well to contact the DA instead of publi…

> Journalism’s purpose is to report current and past events that have a bearing on history — both political and social.

No, it's not. Journalism serves the current public interest, not history, except insofar as the latter serves the former.

> You may not want to work with a former KKK member, but that doesn’t mean the press (or anyone) has any business exposing their sins in public, unless there are specific crimes for which penal justice has yet to be served.

The scope of the public interest isn't limited to crimes, that's a ludicrous idea. Heck, that's not even consistent with your earlier claim about the relationship between journalism and history, as the interest of history is much broader than crimes.

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

#69

Post by ryanhuff »

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…

If I took what Facebook presents to me through my feed as a news source to influence my POV, I might believe that Obama is a secret Muslim, or that Trump was done away with years ago, and is instead an alien, or that Helen Hunt, the actress, is involved in international child trafficking, or perhaps that COVID-19 was put in place to control the world's population. In my experience, all Facebook does is reveal and feed upon people's worst needs, desires, fears. I'll take the NY Times over this any day of the week.

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

#70

Post by mtgp1000 »

cameronbrown wrote: post #64
_jal wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're asking for a state of affairs that had never existed. De-platforming/cancelling is the hip word at the moment, and powerful people are getting nervous, because it is the rabble instead of the powerful doing the canceling. I have two responses: (1) The amount of self-awareness demonstrated by the elites tends to be related to how they fair in peasant revolts. (2) People have short memories, the class-driven sta…

> People have short memories, the class-driven state of affairs you prefer will be back soon enough. Are you sure? Can anyone be sure of this? The internet has fundamentally altered the dynamic with the new Gutenberg revolution. Now the angry mobs have louder voices than even the largest institutions. Worse, people at these institutions are encouraging the mob for clickbait driven profit. The incentives are perverse…

With unprecedented power comes unprecedented responsibility.
Post reply on HN