Personally, I'm of the opinion that their coverage did cross a line. The coverage of Pao's ouster in general crossed all kinds of lines. We now know that most

Personally, I'm of the opinion that their coverage did cross a line. The coverage of Pao's ouster in general crossed all kinds of lines. We now know that most of the public ill-will towards her was completely unfounded. It's the nature of internet media in general. Everybody wants to be first. Being correct and balanced are nice-to-haves that I'm not sure any media outlet cares about anymore. This goes for online and other media. Even journals target studies with eye catching headlines. This all goes to problems with advertising revenue. Page views and clicks generate revenue almost blindly. End users are engaging not based on trust or value, but based on common themes. It's not sustainable, and if it is sustainable it's not right. The same goes for VC money. I suppose _most_ investment money has been forever broken because they target generic measurable milestones and not quality or long term sustainability which is difficult to truly analyze. I suppose that's why most big silicon valley companies are housed in the shells of former big silicon valley companies. I'm stereotyping here, and yc could very well be much different, but this is definitely an impression that I have. I've never gone after VC money myself, so I could be off base by a long shot.