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

341–350 of 373 posts

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#341

Post by tripzilch »

philwelch wrote: post #286
acdha wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. "Hit piece" is a loaded term. So far there's no reason to warrant it just because they wish she was channeling their PR department. 2. Again, we have no reason to think this isn't true - they're in damage control mode trying to say it wasn't serious but nobody is claiming that it wasn't a real quote. Much as you seem to be personally invested in attacking her credibility, it's simply not possible to seriously clai…

I think Sarah's sensationalizing it because sensationalizing things is her business. That's all.

Let's assume that the Uber Executive was also doing his business then.

Seems to me very clear that one's quite a bit deeper in the wrong than the other, "doing their business".

(also, I disagree with the term "sensationalizing" when the facts of what actually happened are in fact already "sensational" enough to stand for themselves. Stating that you're worried about your children when someone calls to investigate and dig dirt on "your personal lives, your families" isn't really adding any extra "sensation" to what is already out on the table, it merely informs me that she has children to worry about)

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#342

Post by tripzilch »

wpietri wrote: post #282
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,…

In front of journalists, the man talked in detail about a plan to destroy journalists giving negative coverage. As far as I know, you're the only person calling it "a conspiracy". But plenty of people are taking that as a way of threatening journalists. The "blowing off steam" theory doesn't strike me as plausible. If it had happened at his local alley while talking with his bowling team, sure, maybe. But the CEO and…

> If it had happened at his local alley while talking with his bowling team, sure, maybe.

Several relevant scenes from The Big Lebowski come to mind ... :)

(it'd make me seriously reconsider my choice of bowling-buddies, though :) )

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#343

Post by morganvachon »

dang wrote: post #320
morganvachon wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> Troll harder. Please don't bait other users, even when they seem to you to be trolling.

Sorry, I didn't mean it as baiting, just venting a little. Just based on this conversation and his other posts, it's obvious what he is.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#344

Post by TheCowboy »

just2n wrote: post #240
TheCowboy wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To what extent are you "entitled" to "investigate" into the personal lives of journalists and public critics? If your goal is not to intimidate, what purpose does it serve and accomplish? Freedom of the press is important and is part of the Constitution. Journalists can investigate a business even if you think they shouldn't. Looking into the financial ties of journalism is game. But the industry and business of jour…

To what extent are you "entitled" to "investigate" into the personal lives of entrepreneurs and people building real value. If your goal is not to intimidate, attack, or slander, what purpose does it serve and accomplish? Freedom of speech and self publication is important and is part of the Constitution. Entrepreneurs can investigate shady journalists who seem to have a bias and who are crossing ethical lines even i…

I have difficulty seeing how this is a quality contribution to any discussion and not trolling.

You know I didn't advocate probing the personal lives of entrepreneurs, and if you honestly believe I did advocate that then the problem is you are reading something that I didn't say.

If anything, saying something like "investigating the personal lives of entrepreneurs building real value" sounds more like a sound bite a bad politician or PR rep would concoct to shield a business from public scrutiny. Instances of 'entrepreneurs building real value' is also something that is fair to cover by journalists.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#345

Post by jarnix »

I won't use Uber (I live in Paris), because of what they did with Lyft, because some executive harassing a woman (story of yesterday on hn), because of this story as well. There are a lot of competitors who do not have their hands that dirty. I'm using Chauffeur Price here, never had to complain.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#346

Post by imgabe »

So they would investigate the journalists's private lives and publish all their embarrassing details in order to cause drama and controversy to further their own goals.

You mean like the media does with every public figure, ever? Like the media is doing with this exact story right now?

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#347

Post by mipapage »

imanaccount247 wrote: post #225
mipapage wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, its not PC is it? It is holding oneself to a standard. It is clear that this man - and Uber it would seem - are not behaving to a standard that people would support. A concept so simple that is lost on so many.

>Well, its not PC is it? Really? Then why is it so notable that the person is a "female journalist"? Why are people deliberately distorting "journalists are dragging our private affairs out to use against us, we should do it to them" as "he's threatening to reveal the locations of people's children"? >are not behaving to a standard that people would support. Many people do support, that's precisely what I said. I am…

It would be quite hard to judge how many people 'kept Uber installed despite this incident'. A simple scan over HN and the comments under the stories about this do not support your stance that many do support Uber in this.

The simple idea of "journalists are dragging our private affairs out to use against us, we should do it to them" is where these people fell down. Sure, some people are distorting it and it could therefore give the appearance of being pc, but in reality this is a moral problem.

Had they (he) held themselves to a higher standard, behaving in a morally responsible way, none of these things would happen and indeed they could be a leader in more ways than they originally intended to be (transportation).

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#348

Post by bakhy »

cwkoss wrote: post #299
bakhy wrote: post #94

Uber's only purpose and meaning is exploitation. Yes, the app is handy, but it's no disruption. The disruption is in destabilizing the taxi cooperatives and weakening the drivers' position. We should all cut the crap, there is nothing to be surprised by here.

Destabilizing taxi monopolies is a very positive societal disruption. I don't know where you're from but here Uber is half the cost of a cab, better service, and they actually have clean cars. If you don't think they're disruptive, I'm not sure how you define disruptive.

Read my comment again, that's more or less exactly what I said. Except I do not see such a simple black and white picture. Taxi monopolies have formed to enable the drivers a better bargaining position. Uber is achieving lower prices by destroying this, and as we can see, once that is done, nothing stops them from turning the tables and driving the price too low for the drivers to survive. The drivers are not their employees, and so not their responsibility. That is the core of their model. I think they're a little more disruptive than needed, basically :)

Taxi monopolies easily grow into a problem. They overprice the rides and stifle the market. But this can usually be sorted out through political action, through opening competition, all without automatically destroying all semblance of security for the workers.

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#349

Post by imgabe »

andrewdupont wrote: post #332
baxterross wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, journalists get a pass when they 'investigate' someone, but the people they're investigating can't do a 'counter-investigation'? Are journalists some kind of special beings?

You're equating the two kinds of investigating. The "counter-investigation" you're talking about is retaliatory — write something we don't like and we'll punish you with details about your personal life. Journalists are not special beings, but it is typically presumed that they report in good faith, and without ulterior motives. I know that isn't always true, but it's true often enough that I think the burden of proo…

How would they prove the journalist's intent was malicious without conducting an investigation of their own?

Re: Uber Executive Suggests Digging Up Dirt on Journalists

#350

Post by crpatino »

iblaine wrote: post #295

Poke a bear with a hot stick and you might get bit. I don't see what the big deal is.

This was closer to being growled at. "Getting bit" is more like the robber baron sending half-a-dozen of pinkertons to your home, and neither you nor your family is ever seen again.

And the big deal is that is very much on the public interest to not see the days of the pinkertons come back again, so the bears have to be trained and get used to being poked at.

Post reply on HN