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

Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 202 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#141

Post by ggm »

the_reformation wrote: post #135
ggm wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That tax keeps people in jobs. That tax kept social capital i the town heart. The bigstore on the edge of town, and mail-order destroys social capital. I absolutely get the prices were higher. I have lived this experience in different times, and short of cash I resented paying that markup in the corner store. But now, older and I think a little wiser I realize that what I did, was suck energy out of the local communi…

So you expect all customers to accept higher prices because of the community aesthetic you personally enjoy more?

Yes. I think I do. Which is at the heart of any tax discussion: So you expect all local citizens to accept higher taxes because of the community utility function you expect everyone to contribute to

What you're driving to, is that get off my goddam lawn and I drive over the border to buy cheaper and screw the lot of you get off my lawn is really fine.. except it isn't. Its pretty sad. But sure, its legal, go for it, don't worry, I can't stop you. I can feel about it, but you don't care what I feel so there's no downside. Right?

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#142

Post by nyolfen »

debt wrote: post #116
JimmyAustin wrote: post #19

Peter Thiel (worth 2.5b) destroyed Gawker with a contribution of 10m to Hulk Hogan's legal fund. If Bezos contributed a similar proportion of his fortune (112b), he would be contributing 448m. Not only is the National Enquirer about to be in the shitfight of its life, but every single other lawsuit it's going to be facing will be armed to the teeth with amazing legal talent. Couldn't have happened to nicer people.

[flagged]

nothing in his letter suggests it was directed by "trump or his people"

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#143

Post by tptacek »

Novashi wrote: post #66
JimmyAustin wrote: post #19

Peter Thiel (worth 2.5b) destroyed Gawker with a contribution of 10m to Hulk Hogan's legal fund. If Bezos contributed a similar proportion of his fortune (112b), he would be contributing 448m. Not only is the National Enquirer about to be in the shitfight of its life, but every single other lawsuit it's going to be facing will be armed to the teeth with amazing legal talent. Couldn't have happened to nicer people.

Here's the cherry on top: https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1093654471157170177 AMI probably just broke their non-prosecution agreement with the SDNY

What AMI did is unlikely to be criminal.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#144

Post by ehmish »

chockZ wrote: post #101
loeg wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually not, but this one surely is. It's 90% direct quotes and paraphrase from the primary source, adding nothing of value; and it elides the incredibly relevant letters exchanged between Bezos et al and AMI. I think it's a pretty great example of how to blogspam and it's somewhat tragic that the NYT is resorting to blogspam for clicks.

I'm sorry, but how else would you write about this story? Is the NY Times just supposed to not cover it? The story is literally the post by Jeff Bezos, which they link to first in their article.

No, but we should really not have upvoted it quite so highly considering it's a non-primary source that isn't really adding anything

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#145

Post by neveroffensive »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #57
throwaway2048 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure that billionaires destroying media outlets is something to be cheered on.

Since media outlets don't engage in blackmail, there are none involved in this dispute. This is a billionaire versus a filthy, blackmailing rag.

Nothing you've said here is wrong. The enquirer doesn't meet the minimum standards of journalism, they are a blackmail rag. I think this could actually be proven with empirical data.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#146

Post by aswanson »

r00fus wrote: post #137
aswanson wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owner is a Trump affiliated scumbag who ran "catch and kill" cover for Donald during the primaries. These people are so moronic and unethical. I can't wait for this era of American Idiocracy to be over.

It’ll still be here after Trump. He’s just the largest symptom.

Agreed. It's just sad that a mag that runs stories on Kennedy conspiracy theories and rat boy stories runs cover for a reality show dolt that has his hands on the nuke codes, and half the U.S.electorate cheers that on. Real life is far more cynical than sarcasm.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#149

Post by debt »

nyolfen wrote: post #142
debt wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

nothing in his letter suggests it was directed by "trump or his people"

Apparently you didn’t read his post:

Exhibit A:

“My ownership of the Washington Post is a complexifier for me. It’s unavoidable that certain powerful people who experience Washington Post news coverage will wrongly conclude I am their enemy.

President Trump is one of those people, obvious by his many tweets.”

Exhibit B:

“In the AMI letters I’m making public, you will see the precise details of their extortionate proposal: They will publish the personal photos unless Gavin de Becker and I make the specific false public statement to the press that we “have no knowledge or basis for suggesting that AMI’s coverage was politically motivated or influenced by political forces.”

If we do not agree to affirmatively publicize that specific lie.”

That last line more or less admits Bezos thinks this is politically motivated as denying that would constitute him lying.

Post reply on HN