Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go? • Hacker News Board

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#51

Post by RokStdy » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:47 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #45

RokStdy wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um.. That's sort of their job? Why the outrage here? It's not like the story actually calls for Snapchat's CEO's head to really be severed. That might be offensive. I think the author's point is a good one. If CEO is really so obtuse he should go. If he is being coached to act this way then his coach should be fired[1]. Pretty straight forward business journalism. It's not like the business journalist went on a long…

On one hand you have a CEO that responded slowly to a fairly mild privacy exploit. On the other hand, he created an apparently billion+ dollar company almost overnight. So, I'm going to guess that SnapChat should keep its CEO.

That is a totally fair point, and you might be right.

But I cannot understand the low-grade media backlash here. That was my point. It seems like writing an article with the thesis that "whoever is planning crisis management at Snapchat is horrible an needs to go" isn't wildly beyond the pale.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#52

Post by anigbrowl » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:48 PM UTC

001sky wrote: post #3

Where does media punditry get off on making absolutist calls for heads to "roll"? I mean, imaging if random non-experts had a journalist fired for every failed-prediction or embarrasingly wrong policy analysis penned in an op-ed? There would be no journalists left !

Thoughtful, nuanced commentary doesn't get as many eyeballs. This is part of the problem from journalist's personal brands becoming part of the news story. When I was growing up I had no idea what any of the people who wrote for the newspaper looked like, or what their names were for all but the very largest stories.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#53

Post by w1ntermute » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:48 PM UTC

3am wrote: post #21

icedog wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a business that doesn't have any business.

Did you read the WSJ Andreesen interview that's on the frontpage ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7007332 )? He gave a plausible and coherent explanation of Snapchat's strategy (spoiler: Tencent of the West). I think that Tencent's valuation is stretched and I think Snapchat is unlikely to succeed even if that is actually their goal... but it was interesting, anyway. edit: hey, w1ntermute, thank you for that in…

> He gave a plausible and coherent explanation of Snapchat's strategy

No, he doesn't. All he did was demonstrate his utter lack of understanding of East Asia.

East Asian cultures are high-context, meaning that when Tencent released non-messenger services (that could actually turn a profit), users were much more likely to use them because they were already familiar with the company and its existing messaging service. But this strategy does not work well in the low-context cultures of the West, where people are more comfortable with giving new companies and products a chance. Snapchat cannot expand into other verticals with the ease that Tencent did.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#54

Post by uladzislau » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:48 PM UTC

iLoch wrote: post #26

Take a deal and jump ship boys, your idea won't be worth anything in 6 months when the next big thing comes out.

Probably it's too late already.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#55

Post by aryastark » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:48 PM UTC

You would assume CNNMoney would be more concerned with the CEO's lack of a business plan rather than his lack of apology. Let's get our priorities straight here. I mean, if you're not making money, do you really have a business? Does any of this even matter? If a tree falls in the forest...

It takes a certain type of person to use Snapchat. A person that believes in unicorns. That is, someone that believes you can erase things you send over the internet. I suppose if you believe in that absurdity, then you may also believe in whatever nonsense the CEO might tell you about their enhanced security that will prevent this type of breach from ever occurring again.

Or you could just stop using the damn thing. Vote with your wallet, er, eyeballs.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#56

Post by rokhayakebe » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:49 PM UTC

spamizbad wrote: post #44

001sky wrote: post #3

Where does media punditry get off on making absolutist calls for heads to "roll"? I mean, imaging if random non-experts had a journalist fired for every failed-prediction or embarrasingly wrong policy analysis penned in an op-ed? There would be no journalists left !

For a meritocracy to work there must be consequences for both good and bad actions. A pundit's merit is judged by their page views; not by their correctness. Their salary is based off their readership. If their readership wants to be fed convenient lies that reenforce their world view that's their perogative.

I recently heard Sarah Lacy say they ensure their writers do not know the pageview count.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#57

Post by octatone2 » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:52 PM UTC

jimsilverman wrote: post #36

i'm shocked by the comments here. it was a massive and anticipated security flaw. the CEO's reaction was not to fix it, not to apologize, but to arrogantly lie about the severity of the threat. less than a week after the CEO deemed the attack theoretical, it happened. the CEO's reaction was not to fix it, not to apologize, but to offer an opt-out after the damage had been done. not sure why snapchat is getting a free…

I think there is a generation who simply care not of privacy.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#58

Post by code_duck » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 9:57 PM UTC

jimsilverman wrote: post #36

i'm shocked by the comments here. it was a massive and anticipated security flaw. the CEO's reaction was not to fix it, not to apologize, but to arrogantly lie about the severity of the threat. less than a week after the CEO deemed the attack theoretical, it happened. the CEO's reaction was not to fix it, not to apologize, but to offer an opt-out after the damage had been done. not sure why snapchat is getting a free…

What I can figure out is why more hasn't been made of how the snapchat app doesn't delete viewed photos at all: it stores them in the phone permanently.

http://m.ksl.com/index/story/sid/25106057?mobile_direct=y

http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/partner-zone-infose...

Seems to me like a massive breach of trust which defies the entire claim of the app.

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#59

Post by Crito » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 10:00 PM UTC

octatone2 wrote: post #57

jimsilverman wrote: post #36

i'm shocked by the comments here. it was a massive and anticipated security flaw. the CEO's reaction was not to fix it, not to apologize, but to arrogantly lie about the severity of the threat. less than a week after the CEO deemed the attack theoretical, it happened. the CEO's reaction was not to fix it, not to apologize, but to offer an opt-out after the damage had been done. not sure why snapchat is getting a free…

I think there is a generation who simply care not of privacy.

Is that really true? Why are people using Snapchat then, instead of SMS or even twitter?

It seems to me that the entire premise of Snapchat is that their users care about privacy (even if they are rather naive or uninformed about how privacy works).

Re: Does Snapchat's CEO Need to Go?

#60

Post by robterrell » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 10:01 PM UTC

w1ntermute wrote: post #53

3am wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the WSJ Andreesen interview that's on the frontpage ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7007332 )? He gave a plausible and coherent explanation of Snapchat's strategy (spoiler: Tencent of the West). I think that Tencent's valuation is stretched and I think Snapchat is unlikely to succeed even if that is actually their goal... but it was interesting, anyway. edit: hey, w1ntermute, thank you for that in…

> He gave a plausible and coherent explanation of Snapchat's strategy No, he doesn't. All he did was demonstrate his utter lack of understanding of East Asia. East Asian cultures are high-context, meaning that when Tencent released non-messenger services (that could actually turn a profit), users were much more likely to use them because they were already familiar with the company and its existing messaging service.…

That's what people said about Asia-style free-to-play games, too: that they would never work in the West due to cultural differences. Turns out that was totally wrong.