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

151–160 of 202 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#151

Post by travisoneill1 »

ggm wrote: post #90

I can relate to a plague on both their houses but it is important to worry a bit about 'law of unintended consequences' effects. Bezos is going to get something ordinary mortals cannot, (redress) because of his money. So he isn't a champion for fundamental rights against press abuse, he's a champion for millionaires rights. A real win here is for a global press industry to adopt redress measures ordinary people can u…

Jeff Bezos did not wreck small town shopping. People's collective desire for convenience did. And why is this a bad thing? Should people be forced to shop in a way they don't want to?

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#152

Post by AndrewKemendo »

yerich wrote: post #76
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.

What's the New York Times supposed to do for their readers? Not publish anything? De Becker, AMI and Amazon were asked for comment and declined. Besides, only a few paragraphs from the story are quotes from the blog post.

Yes exactly that. It's proof though that they're just an entertainment rag looking for eyeballs.

Do some digging, find out more context, get relevant legal precedents, or any precedents for this kind of action. Reference Gawker case, all of the stuff that talks about WHY this is important.

They basically just reposted Bezos' letter but in their own words with some of his quotes thrown in.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#153

Post by jonnycoder »

mirkules wrote: post #91
basil-rash wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh god, can you imagine if you consistently got your orders fulfilled by the scam/knockoff providers? Being absurdly rich, yet everything you own is cheaply made and you have no clue why.

Wow, you have just described my Amazon shopping experience, except without being absurdly (or even remotely) rich. But seriously, I actually got caught up in Amazon’s anti-fake-review dragnet and my account cannot review anymore without possibility of appeal. Being falsely accused made me irritated just enough to boycott all Amazon services. At first it was tough, but then I realized I spend money on good quality pro…

Fully agree, and walmart online is an easy replacement and often less expensive.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#154

Post by Invictus0 »

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?

You ask that question like it's the height of stupidity, seemingly failing to remember that it has been that way for the last hundred years. To put it a different way, wouldn't you rather pay a few cents more support your community and fellow neighbors than feed the checkbook of a $100B sweatshop owner a thousand miles away?

Of course, I already know the answer.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#155

Post by comex »

tptacek wrote: post #143
Novashi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

From the New York Penal Law article 135.60 (AMI is headquartered in New York):

> A person is guilty of coercion in the second degree when he or she compels or induces a person to engage in conduct which the latter has a legal right to abstain from engaging in, [..] by means of instilling in him or her a fear that, if the demand is not complied with, the actor or another will:

[..]

> 5. Expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject some person to hatred, contempt or ridicule;

[..]

> Coercion in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#156

Post by tptacek »

comex wrote: post #155
tptacek wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What AMI did is unlikely to be criminal.

From the New York Penal Law article 135.60 (AMI is headquartered in New York): > A person is guilty of coercion in the second degree when he or she compels or induces a person to engage in conduct which the latter has a legal right to abstain from engaging in, [..] by means of instilling in him or her a fear that, if the demand is not complied with, the actor or another will: [..] > 5. Expose a secret or publicize an…

https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/10936583665834229...

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#157

Post by Novashi »

tptacek wrote: post #143
Novashi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't think Bezos's post was necessarily a tell-all of everything they could have against AMI though. It just looked like the first shot.

IANAL, no evidence, just opinions, etc.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#158

Post by selimthegrim »

ggm wrote: post #118
lxmorj wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy that "buying your shit at huge markup from a local shop" is some great boone to a community. It's effectively a tax on everyone in town, subsidizing the one family that owns the shop. There are plenty of businesses that are more local-friendly, but household necessities aren't one of them.

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…

My local corner store is run by Palestinians who have no compunction telling me in front of the mostly black clientele that they [aforementioned clientele] would “never survive in the old country because there’s no welfare there.” This was greeted during the recent government shutdown with grumbled threats of riots if SNAP wasn’t sorted out. Mayberry and Bodega Cat they all are not.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#159

Post by sytelus »

nyolfen wrote: post #117
sytelus wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are missing the point. Entities like National Enquirer are not like Gawker that was bankrupted by Thiel with his wealth might. These entities are funded by politics aka American GDP aka your tax dollars. As Bezos clearly outlined in this letter, Trump administration helped these people have very lucrative deals with Saudies to get their financing, very likely, US government doing some favors to Saudies in return.…

the justice department certainly can in fact kill it

It takes less than an hour of paperwork to spin a new business entity that is exactly the same as old. Bankruptcy laws limits financial losses for owners. Entities like AMI are often set up in a way so such financial losses would be negligible, if any.

Re: Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

#160

Post by untog »

neveroffensive wrote: post #140
untog wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all but inevitable that a news publisher will get a story wrong at some point, that's why corrections get issued. So it's still a lot of power to put in the hands of the already powerful.

There's a difference between a correction to a flawed article and attempted blackmail though... One is an accident that can occurre in the course of good journalism, the other is something else entirely.

Oh sure. I was talking in the context of Thiel and Gawker, not Bezos and the National Enquirer.
Post reply on HN