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

Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

talkingbiznews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 206 posts

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#61

Post by opportune »

amiga_500 wrote: post #46
dredmorbius wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it to slavishly neoliberal. That (or in its older guise, free-trade principles) is literally a founding premise of the newspaper: PROSPECTUS: of a weekly paper, to be published every Saturday, and to be called THE ECONOMIST, which will contain ... First.—ORIGINAL LEADING ARTICLES, in which free-trade principles will be most rigidly applied to all the important questions of the day—political events—and parliame…

Slavishly neoliberal is not the same as free trade. Adam Smith, whom they model themselves after, was against rentier activity, The Economist is not. The UK is presently embroiled in negotiating all kinds of trade agreements as part of Brexit, and none of the countries will be signing a reciprocal "free trade" agreement between the two, it's a pipe dream. In addition, Smith would have been appalled at the UK running…

The Economist has always been very against Brexit. I do think they might not necessarily oppose rentiership (you have to keep in mind which family owns The Economist) but in later interpretations of “liberalism” rentiership is seen a logical extension of the right of property ownership, so I don’t think it’s necessarily incompatible with a classically liberal outlook

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#62

Post by bryanrasmussen »

greatgib wrote: post #36

The point of the chief editor is so true that I'm surprised to read that from them. I have noticed that a lot of times with this kind of web media. - You have a clickbait title like this: "How a normal guy managed to hack WallStreet with a simple pen" - Then, you have one page of interesting introduction on the topic but without the reply to the title question. "In november 2018, WallStreet was busy with the introduc…

The world needs more heroes like John Crowford, now more than ever.

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#63

Post by lowmemcpu »

bredren wrote: post #25
MBCook wrote: post #13

Oh, are they finally apologizing (or providing proof for) their story The Big Hack about chips the size of a grain of rice China puts in computers made by Dell and Apple and others? No? Not a word about it? It’s almost like they’re continuing to pretend that their giant journalistic screwup doesn’t exist. Don’t care. ‘Are articles are too long’. How about yours articles are untrustworthy?

Some bloggers (well gruber at least) still bring this up any time they newly cite Bloomberg. It does defy explanation that the publication has not been able to offer proof of the claims from that article or simply rescind it.

They should continue to bring it up, every time, until the story is rescinded.

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#64

Post by supernova87a »

_jal wrote: post #27
dade_ wrote: post #7

Articles in The Economist are usually a better investment of my time. I was originally introduced to the magazine by a teacher in high school, but I've come to learn that many other people weren't as fortunate. https://www.economist.com/

I find that Economist articles about things I don't know much about are great. But the more I know about the topic, the less I think of the article. It isn't just the spin; sometimes you can guess whom they were talking to and whom they weren't by how wrong and they way they get something wrong.

I agree -- the Economist is the exact opposite of what Bloomberg is pointing out. They provide a few scant (or no) examples, and then oddly jump to extrapolating what we should do about the universe. They don't seem to build credibility within an article to make you think they should know what should be done on some specific issue.

Sorry to fall back on a stereotype, but they come off as Oxford students sitting in college, pontificating on the world they've read about.

Maybe I'm mostly thinking about their pseudo-opinion pieces. It just got to the point I didn't enjoy reading them, and no longer do.

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#65

Post by Youden »

greatgib wrote: post #36

The point of the chief editor is so true that I'm surprised to read that from them. I have noticed that a lot of times with this kind of web media. - You have a clickbait title like this: "How a normal guy managed to hack WallStreet with a simple pen" - Then, you have one page of interesting introduction on the topic but without the reply to the title question. "In november 2018, WallStreet was busy with the introduc…

In case someone wants an example of an actual published story that looks like this, here's one from the NY Times: https://www.wsj.com/articles/who-is-the-mystery-shopper-leav...

1100 words to answer the titular question, which really only needed a paragraph or two.

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#66

Post by saagarjha »

razakel wrote: post #10
dade_ wrote: post #7

Articles in The Economist are usually a better investment of my time. I was originally introduced to the magazine by a teacher in high school, but I've come to learn that many other people weren't as fortunate. https://www.economist.com/

Bill Gates has said The Economist is the only magazine he reads cover-to-cover as it makes him think critically about the world.

Blindly following what Bill Gates says he does would be the opposite of thinking critically, however ;)

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#67

Post by the-pigeon »

razakel wrote: post #31
_jal wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find that Economist articles about things I don't know much about are great. But the more I know about the topic, the less I think of the article. It isn't just the spin; sometimes you can guess whom they were talking to and whom they weren't by how wrong and they way they get something wrong.

>But the more I know about the topic, the less I think of the article. Gell-Mann Amnesia, as Michael Crichton put it: "Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the…

And IMO it's gotta much worse since Crichton said that do to online style publishing encouraging newspapers to be even looser with fact checkers and always trying to publish things ASAP over trying to publish something that is interesting, informative and/or factually corrective.

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#68

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

Youden wrote: post #65
greatgib wrote: post #36

The point of the chief editor is so true that I'm surprised to read that from them. I have noticed that a lot of times with this kind of web media. - You have a clickbait title like this: "How a normal guy managed to hack WallStreet with a simple pen" - Then, you have one page of interesting introduction on the topic but without the reply to the title question. "In november 2018, WallStreet was busy with the introduc…

In case someone wants an example of an actual published story that looks like this, here's one from the NY Times: https://www.wsj.com/articles/who-is-the-mystery-shopper-leav... 1100 words to answer the titular question, which really only needed a paragraph or two.

Isn't that the Wall St. Journal? I have a sub for the NYT, and it's asking me to subscribe.

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#69

Post by systemvoltage »

Legogris wrote: post #53
MBCook wrote: post #13

Oh, are they finally apologizing (or providing proof for) their story The Big Hack about chips the size of a grain of rice China puts in computers made by Dell and Apple and others? No? Not a word about it? It’s almost like they’re continuing to pretend that their giant journalistic screwup doesn’t exist. Don’t care. ‘Are articles are too long’. How about yours articles are untrustworthy?

Is this what state-fed misinformation looks like?

Possibly, but just as Bloomberg cannot prove legitimacy of their story, your claim is equal in that regard.

So, best to not speculate and conspire.

Re: Bloomberg chief editor: We publish too many mediocre and long enterprise stories

#70

Post by gknight »

greatgib wrote: post #36

The point of the chief editor is so true that I'm surprised to read that from them. I have noticed that a lot of times with this kind of web media. - You have a clickbait title like this: "How a normal guy managed to hack WallStreet with a simple pen" - Then, you have one page of interesting introduction on the topic but without the reply to the title question. "In november 2018, WallStreet was busy with the introduc…

This is so true. When I click on a compelling headline and the article starts with some sort of description unrelated to the headline like that, I bail.
Post reply on HN