I thought it was $8/month and thought that was way too low.
The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
41–50 of 134 posts
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#42"[The NYT] decided tech was a major power center that needed scrutiny and needed to be taken down a peg, and this style of coverage became very widespread and prominent in the industry ... the press should try to normalize coverage of the tech industry as just another business sector." The irony here is that a prominent member of the 'tech industry' (with enthusiastic support from other prominent tech industry lumina…
It’s also weird coming after decades of tech reshaping media: local news is a fraction of what it once was, leaving important stories uncovered; things like Facebook’s infamous pivot to video, instant news pages, Google AMP, etc. all pulled control to tech companies and lost money for media companies; and the very way people write headlines and stories changed based on social media and search company decisions. Musk…
Nothing stopping the media companies from making their own football. The owner of the NYT is a billionaire, he couldn't hire a few CS grads and make a site people wanted to go to?
It's like they saw the whole Napster situation and said, "Thank goodness that's happening to audio media; we'll be fine because we're visual media! Let's just keep running the printing press."
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the journalists I've seen have expressed just the oppossite, an ease with leaving twitter if these get enacted, what makes you say that " A lot of journalists' entire self worth seems wrapped up in their twitter audience frankly."
> an ease with leaving twitter if these get enacted I'll believe that one when I see it; feels very much like celebs announcing they're moving to Canada. More broadly, I think the original tweet thread picks up on something interesting: that blue-check group is bifurcated into actual-clout-havers, e.g. Steven King, who really could/would walk away, and epsilon-from-irrelevant journos who have it as a facet of their e…
"Steven King doesn't care. Journalist who wants to believe they're a member of the same club as Steven King definitely cares."
Really? You think journalists want to be in the same club as Stephen King? Because they both happen to write?
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#44>Instead of covering the [tech] industry with a business press lens or a consumer lens they started covering it with a very tough investigative lens — highly oppositional at all times and occasionally unfair. ... >Tech executives and investors mostly did not like this change, for understandable reasons. And I mostly agree with them on the merits. The author agrees - that the tech industry should not be subject to inv…
Yglesias doesn't think that no investigation should be done or that tech is all good- he has a riff that "Facebook is bad, Facebook employees should feel bad about working there, and they should feel shame admitting where they work" that he goes on occasionally.
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#45Was it really a top-down decision by the NYT publisher, or a visceral reaction by the journalism profession to the destruction of its career prospects by the Internet?
He's been a prominent opinion writer for almost 20 years and has close ties with a lot of people who work at the NYT he probably knows.
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#46>Instead of covering the [tech] industry with a business press lens or a consumer lens they started covering it with a very tough investigative lens — highly oppositional at all times and occasionally unfair. ... >Tech executives and investors mostly did not like this change, for understandable reasons. And I mostly agree with them on the merits. The author agrees - that the tech industry should not be subject to inv…
Yglesias doesn't think that no investigation should be done or that tech is all good- he has a riff that "Facebook is bad, Facebook employees should feel bad about working there, and they should feel shame admitting where they work" that he goes on occasionally.
[deleted]
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meanwhile Bezos owns the Washington Post, and while he doesn't seem to have messed with it too much, Amazon has absolutely been messing with the neutrality of IMDB where it comes into conflict with Amazon's media IPs.
https://letterboxd.com is the best source for scoping out a movie now. The ratings histogram for each film is incredibly informative about quality. It also happens to be my favorite social network right now since it's so focused.
I like letterboxd a lot as well. Its a bit like patreon for me where you can follow some person that you really like and read their stuff and its cool. You get a lot of nice in depth reviews from people, and varied tastes, and unlike other movie sites it doesn't feel like big blockbusters with big budgets float to the top.
I also like hackernews.
I think the magic is in very focused social media.
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#48"[The NYT] decided tech was a major power center that needed scrutiny and needed to be taken down a peg, and this style of coverage became very widespread and prominent in the industry ... the press should try to normalize coverage of the tech industry as just another business sector." The irony here is that a prominent member of the 'tech industry' (with enthusiastic support from other prominent tech industry lumina…
> What does matter: the NYT's decision to focus skeptical reporting on tech as an "important power center" sure seems to have been vindicated.
So in effect the NYT which have been an "important power center" of American media since the 1800's, decides that another entity that comes along with too much power needs to be "taken down a peg".
Its a power play to discredit a new entrant into a business sector that threatens the inheritors of the incumbents.
So call it vindication, but its only in the same vein of a third generation monarch trying to quell threats to his inheritance. But to that perspective I agree, its definitely the correct power move to keep threats from taking away the power one inherited.
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#49In other words: jaded, snarky, city hipster. Not about fairness or journalistic integrity like Walter Cronkite, but with a particular agenda. That's not investigative journalism but merely lazy, superficial gossip with a patina of formality and credibility-washed with their brand.
So much for "the paper of record".
Re: The New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage
#50>Instead of covering the [tech] industry with a business press lens or a consumer lens they started covering it with a very tough investigative lens — highly oppositional at all times and occasionally unfair. ... >Tech executives and investors mostly did not like this change, for understandable reasons. And I mostly agree with them on the merits. The author agrees - that the tech industry should not be subject to inv…
> You can suggest that coverage is inaccurate or unfair, but suggesting that tech should not be covered with an investigative lens is hard to argue.
That's because he's being very charitable to what is happening. In fact, under the guise of aggressively investigative coverage, the media is constantly propagating false memes about the industry. Biggest example is the idea that it's dominated by a culture of white tech bros, when in fact it's dominated by highly educated and hard-working Indian and Chinese immigrants.