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

The Disinformation

uncrunched.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: The Disinformation

#71

Post by netcan »

michaelochurch wrote: post #22

This is a case where "disruption" is bad, because "disruption" usually involves overhaul of older ethical principles that emerged after decades of missteps. Journalism is being disrupted (and has been for over 30 years) and the result is that reliable, just-the-facts is getting overrun by this nonsense. People are comparing this to Valleywag. Actually, I like Valleywag. I think it's great. It is exactly what it says…

I disagree. The real "disruption" here is pg's response and subsequent responses, including yours.

Yellow journalism is still a problem. Most people who read some little quote about women in tech from some guy they've never heard of move on. For the core group of people who are interested, the best way to learn about pg's opinions is from pg himself and that is easy to do.

New standards need to emerge. Publishing transcripts or recordings would be a good place to start. But the ability of misquoted individuals to respond is itself a disruption.

Re: The Disinformation

#72

Post by coldtea »

tptacek wrote: post #6
jmduke wrote: post #2

It’s extremely frustrating to have your words rearranged, edited and taken out of context to make it seem like you’re saying something you aren’t. This is absolutely absurd, coming from Arrington, who twisted Jamie Zawinski's words from an anti-crazy-work-hours rant into rallying cry for gullible programmers to "work hard, cry less, and make history": http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/11/watch-a-vc-use-my-name-to-se...

Is what he said wrong? Is his history relevant to the actual message he is communicating here? To me, it seems like the answers are "no" and "no". Guy records a radio PSA saying "don't punch strangers in the nose". Later, it turns out that the guy has a history of punching strangers in the nose. Is the PSA wrong? There's a way to write the comment that points out that Arrington's history here might be checkered. Unfo…

>Is what he said wrong? Is his history relevant to the actual message he is communicating here? To me, it seems like the answers are "no" and "no".

He didn't say it was wrong. He said it was "absurd coming from X" -- which is different.

Re: The Disinformation

#73

Post by PakG1 »

bambax wrote: post #66
tptacek wrote: post #7

I can't imagine how this situation could resolve itself in a way that will make The Information look good. If you weren't aware, it's a publication that asks for more than $30/mo, in exchange (literally, this is the point) for not running clickbait and keeping the signal/noise positive. I was happy to pay a buck a day for that service, but to pay for it and then see them run misleading clickbait makes me feel dumb fo…

I really liked Arrington's post; but most fundamentally, what is the value of the so-called "tech press"? Like so many things, free press in general is being disintermediated, since "leaks" happen without it, outside of it, and many times despite its best efforts to ignore them. Still, one can imagine there's value to the business of keeping the government accountable -- if the business gets done. But in tech? What s…

Well, I'd say the biggest reason why I like them is summarization and curation. Without them, it would take way too much time for me to gather and understand what's happening. Seriously. As well, it would take too much time and effort to choose what to focus on. Now we can debate on whether they do that job well, but I'd warrant that they still do it better and more efficiently than I could myself, and same when compared to social media or discussion forums.

Re: The Disinformation

#74

Post by keypusher »

The right thing to do here was for them to apologize for taking a quote out of context and fire the reporter. Now that ship has sailed, I think her magazine is probably toast.

Re: The Disinformation

#75

Post by keypusher »

Tohhou wrote: post #30
caprad wrote: post #12

Good to see people coming out in support of this horrible editing, and I hope the trouble makers see that it is taking the discussion away from what is important. Why attack someone like pg over this? Is the attempt to shame him into being more women hacker friendly? Isn't he already going out of his way to support women?

The people who attacked PG have an agenda: * Publicly shame as many top males for anything possible to make room for women - assume the worst and don't try to resolve possible misunderstanding privately, but instead immediately engage in public smear campaigns. The little shitlord nerds don't deserve anything. * Smashing the patriarchy requires getting men out of positions of power, because they didn't earn any of it…

Please take this rant somewhere else.

Re: The Disinformation

#76

Post by JoelSutherland »

jasonkester wrote: post #69
tptacek wrote: post #7

I can't imagine how this situation could resolve itself in a way that will make The Information look good. If you weren't aware, it's a publication that asks for more than $30/mo, in exchange (literally, this is the point) for not running clickbait and keeping the signal/noise positive. I was happy to pay a buck a day for that service, but to pay for it and then see them run misleading clickbait makes me feel dumb fo…

Indeed. Especially in light of their response to this article, paraphrased: "It's not that we were trying to be malicious. It's just that we're incapable of parsing spoken English" Followed up in a tweet with "To clarify, even after reading several detailed explanations of the spoken English in question, we're still unable to parse it". So either way, malicious or dim, it's hard to imagine considering them a trustwor…

Not to mention their refusal to admit that they shouldn't be changing quotes in the first place.

Re: The Disinformation

#77

Post by [deleted] »

bambax wrote: post #66
tptacek wrote: post #7

I can't imagine how this situation could resolve itself in a way that will make The Information look good. If you weren't aware, it's a publication that asks for more than $30/mo, in exchange (literally, this is the point) for not running clickbait and keeping the signal/noise positive. I was happy to pay a buck a day for that service, but to pay for it and then see them run misleading clickbait makes me feel dumb fo…

I really liked Arrington's post; but most fundamentally, what is the value of the so-called "tech press"? Like so many things, free press in general is being disintermediated, since "leaks" happen without it, outside of it, and many times despite its best efforts to ignore them. Still, one can imagine there's value to the business of keeping the government accountable -- if the business gets done. But in tech? What s…

[deleted]

Re: The Disinformation

#78

Post by kmfrk »

tptacek wrote: post #7

I can't imagine how this situation could resolve itself in a way that will make The Information look good. If you weren't aware, it's a publication that asks for more than $30/mo, in exchange (literally, this is the point) for not running clickbait and keeping the signal/noise positive. I was happy to pay a buck a day for that service, but to pay for it and then see them run misleading clickbait makes me feel dumb fo…

Is it really a surprise that The Information is bad journalism? Forgive me for linking to Valleywag, but they don't mince word in describing her concept of journalism--- I'm sorry, "reportrepreneurship": http://valleywag.gawker.com/jessica-lessin-throws-intimate-p....

It's just more of the same tech writing, wrapped in WSJ-like finance reporting.

Re: The Disinformation

#79

Post by Tohhou »

keypusher wrote: post #75
Tohhou wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who attacked PG have an agenda: * Publicly shame as many top males for anything possible to make room for women - assume the worst and don't try to resolve possible misunderstanding privately, but instead immediately engage in public smear campaigns. The little shitlord nerds don't deserve anything. * Smashing the patriarchy requires getting men out of positions of power, because they didn't earn any of it…

Please take this rant somewhere else.

Please note the topic you are in.

Re: The Disinformation

#80

Post by Tohhou »

mkr-hn wrote: post #64
Tohhou wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, totes there are no people like this, and the attack on PG was not agenda fueled. http://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAction

You've gone down the spectrum from TiA sensibility, way past AVFM-esque MRA, and into the darkest pits of TRP.

What's your argument?
Post reply on HN