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

Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

buzzfeed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 373 posts

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#241

Post by eli »

nhangen wrote: post #190
Asparagirl wrote: post #3

Attempting to blackmail the press if they challenge your company's PR? Specifically targeting parents' worst fears by threatening to reveal details of the location of their children? Openly rifling through the location metadata of another female journalist, a customer of theirs, without her consent? Implicitly saying they'll leak customer data of Uber customers who are journalists, the kind of thing that can potentia…

In all fairness, Paul and Sara have been on an absolute witch hunt, seemingly angry because of Travis' capitalist ideals. I'm not going to defend the guy that made these comments, but I've heard enough from Sara and Paul to know that Pando has waged war on Uber, and should not be surprised that they've ruffled some feathers. Pando also shares a common investor with Lyft, so there's that...

Acting like an ass is not necessarily a zero-sum game. But that doesn't change the fact that publicly musing about going after someone's family for revenge is totally unacceptable.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#242

Post by morganvachon »

just2n wrote: post #194
morganvachon wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll respectfully disagree. There's nothing "hypothetical" about it, the guy laid out a budget and a game plan for targeted harassment and intimidation of journalists who dared to write negative press. There were multiple high-profile witnesses, and after it all came to light, he called and then emailed the journalist he threatened, to apologize profusely. This is just one more event in a long history of Uber being a…

Even the author of the story said it was hypothetical. Multiple times.

> Even the author of the story said it was hypothetical. Multiple times.

Really? Hmm...Ctrl+F "hypothetical" 0 of 0 results.

And here's a screenshot: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ifydpomabnm8ijb/bfss.png?dl=0

Troll harder.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#243

Post by eli »

nailer wrote: post #137
eli wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is extremely speculative. I know you're just asking questions, but let's give her the benefit of the doubt. Most people don't do things like that and it's not nice to imply otherwise absent any evidence.

It's speculative, but not extremely so. Most people don't randomly suggest they'd be justified going after other people's families after simple criticism, so let's give everyone the benefit of the doubt. EDIT: according to other posters, who read the website in question, Sarah Lacy regularly reports on people's personal lives. Which sounds like exactly what the under person was talking about doing back.

What specifically did she do that would justify investigating her family?

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#244

Post by quadratical »

nhangen wrote: post #190
Asparagirl wrote: post #3

Attempting to blackmail the press if they challenge your company's PR? Specifically targeting parents' worst fears by threatening to reveal details of the location of their children? Openly rifling through the location metadata of another female journalist, a customer of theirs, without her consent? Implicitly saying they'll leak customer data of Uber customers who are journalists, the kind of thing that can potentia…

In all fairness, Paul and Sara have been on an absolute witch hunt, seemingly angry because of Travis' capitalist ideals. I'm not going to defend the guy that made these comments, but I've heard enough from Sara and Paul to know that Pando has waged war on Uber, and should not be surprised that they've ruffled some feathers. Pando also shares a common investor with Lyft, so there's that...

In all fairness, Paul and Sara have been on an absolute witch hunt, seemingly angry because of Travis' capitalist ideals.

I've desperately avoided commenting on anything related to his because I've known Travis for about a decade, but... you are sadly mistaken. Uber has a downright toxic culture. Sarah might have gone a little far here and there, but it is not because Travis is capitalistic, but because he's turned into some kind of megalomaniac nearly unrecognizable from the person I knew a decade ago.

I recently saw a lovely email sent by Travis for an offsite reminding everyone that they were not allowed to fuck their subordinates and he, by extension, was not allowed to fuck anyone. That isn't just toxic to women. That is downright scumbaggery.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#247

Post by prawn »

[deleted] wrote: post #222
Asparagirl wrote: post #3

Attempting to blackmail the press if they challenge your company's PR? Specifically targeting parents' worst fears by threatening to reveal details of the location of their children? Openly rifling through the location metadata of another female journalist, a customer of theirs, without her consent? Implicitly saying they'll leak customer data of Uber customers who are journalists, the kind of thing that can potentia…

[deleted]

When I think off-the-cuff "I'd like to do X" (and it's something unethical), I generally don't have a budget specified and number of staff to hire. And then I tend not to verbalise it to a large room of people.

If their product stands on its own, they don't need to keep doing this.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#248

Post by just2n »

morganvachon wrote: post #242
just2n wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the author of the story said it was hypothetical. Multiple times.

> Even the author of the story said it was hypothetical. Multiple times. Really? Hmm...Ctrl+F "hypothetical" 0 of 0 results. And here's a screenshot: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ifydpomabnm8ijb/bfss.png?dl=0 Troll harder.

Can't tell if incredibly stupid or just doesn't understand English.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#249

Post by philwelch »

Asparagirl wrote: post #181
DontBeADick wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention the fact that Asparagirl has intentionally interpreted his comments in the most sensational way possible, even going so far as to fabricate threats. "Look into your personal lives, your families" somehow magically became: > threatening to reveal details of the location of their children There's clearly a great deal of stupidity on both sides here.

In the same story that they talk about digging up dirt on reporters' families, Uber revealed details of a different reporter's movements to her, without her consent, and supposedly an impossible thing to do. Is it such a stretch to think that revealing details about your family + revealing details about your movements and location could also = revealing details about the movements and location of your family? Again,…

Sarah Lacy is hardly a reliable witness. The whole reason she got involved is because Emil Michael got frustrated with her hit pieces. And if your claim to fame is writing hit pieces, of course an incident like this is going to land right in your wheelhouse and you're going to make hay of it.

Don't misunderstand me here--I just think there are two sides to this story, and both sides are assholes.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#250

Post by philwelch »

metaphorm wrote: post #156
throwaway09F911 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm writing this as a throwaway because this feels like mob and pitchforks. I'm a regular here and have no ties to Uber except using it. This whole story feels like they took a frustrated guy venting at dinner and making it into a conspiracy. Meanwhile, Sarah Lacey comments publicly and insultingly on people's political positions, emotions, and dating life. What the man said was very stupid. But it feels a lot like,…

a journalist's job often involves being "rude". some journalists specialize in "rude" reporting. scrutinizing powerful and wealthy people is one of the legitimate roles of a journalist, even when it comes across as "rude". powerful and wealthy people NEED to be scrutinized. when we do, we often discover that they are sociopathic scum like several of the executives at Uber have turned out to be.

There's scrutiny, and then there's repeatedly provoking people until they react. Has it occurred to you that "journalists" can be powerful and wealthy too, and just as sociopathic?
Post reply on HN