4 ms·

>What's Bloomberg's agenda here? FUD

whyenot 10y ago
>FUD Could you elaborate on that a little? You are responding to an article containing hundreds of words and the best you can do is three letters? Why is it in Bloomberg's interest to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt? Where is the article spreading uncertainty and doubt? I'm not seeing anything.
- leereeves 10y ago
  It's obvious that the article is spreading fear. It's full of terrifying stories. Why is that in Bloomberg's interest? Great question. That's what I'm wondering.
  - ecopoesis 10y ago
    FUD means fear, uncertainty, doubt. I don't think the point of the article was any of those: like most media I'm sure Bloomberg's interest was ad impressions. Which they got from me, and will probably continue to get from me because they publish interesting articles like this that inform of things I didn't know.
    - leereeves 10y ago
      I don't think Bloomberg founded a news agency for the profit from ad impressions. News organizations have agendas, particularly when they share the name of a nationally known politician.
      - ecopoesis 10y ago
        When Bloomberg was founded, Michael Bloomberg was a politician yet. He was a man trying to make money.
    - alphabettsy 10y ago
      Some of the other commenters have spent more time dissecting the writer and publication than the content of the story. If the story contains false or objectionable content I could see the reason for bringing this up, otherwise I personally can't really understand the point. The article mentions plenty of things to indicate possible motives including wages, unionization, and safety regulations. Besides that these seem to be real stories that I honestly would've probably never heard about otherwise. Naively I didn't think most of these jobs were very dangerous, especially after reading stories about Chrysler workers caught drinking and smoking weed at the plants. After reading those stories I assumed these jobs were maybe demanding, but how hard could they be if they can be done while under the influence..? This story brought new perspective for me. Where I see new information, others are only seeing ulterior motive and maybe there's a bit of both.
  - malandrew 10y ago
    Honestly, I don't think it necessarily has to be something in Bloomberg's original interest as a business-focused news outlet. In the past few years, individuals with a strong SJW mindset have infiltrated so many media outlets resulting in the promotion SJW values with near religious fervor. Look at other stories from this same author: https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/APuwLdDPlj8/peter-waldman https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/APuwLdDPlj8/peter-waldman According to his LinkedIn, his focus is on long-form investigative journalism for Bloomberg living in San Francisco. With this in mind, the question remains, why is it in Bloomberg's interest to have a writer like Peter Waldman? I suspect the reason is just to remain competitive for clicks with other news sources like HuffPo, Vox, etc. These days, Bloomberg isn't as focused on their original market as the WSJ or the FT.

>FUD Could you elaborate on that a little? You are responding to an article containing hundreds of words and the best you can do is three letters? Why is it in Bloomberg's interest to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt? Where is the article spreading uncertainty and doubt? I'm not seeing anything.

leereeves 10y ago
It's obvious that the article is spreading fear. It's full of terrifying stories. Why is that in Bloomberg's interest? Great question. That's what I'm wondering.
- ecopoesis 10y ago
  FUD means fear, uncertainty, doubt. I don't think the point of the article was any of those: like most media I'm sure Bloomberg's interest was ad impressions. Which they got from me, and will probably continue to get from me because they publish interesting articles like this that inform of things I didn't know.
  - leereeves 10y ago
    I don't think Bloomberg founded a news agency for the profit from ad impressions. News organizations have agendas, particularly when they share the name of a nationally known politician.
    - ecopoesis 10y ago
      When Bloomberg was founded, Michael Bloomberg was a politician yet. He was a man trying to make money.
  - alphabettsy 10y ago
    Some of the other commenters have spent more time dissecting the writer and publication than the content of the story. If the story contains false or objectionable content I could see the reason for bringing this up, otherwise I personally can't really understand the point. The article mentions plenty of things to indicate possible motives including wages, unionization, and safety regulations. Besides that these seem to be real stories that I honestly would've probably never heard about otherwise. Naively I didn't think most of these jobs were very dangerous, especially after reading stories about Chrysler workers caught drinking and smoking weed at the plants. After reading those stories I assumed these jobs were maybe demanding, but how hard could they be if they can be done while under the influence..? This story brought new perspective for me. Where I see new information, others are only seeing ulterior motive and maybe there's a bit of both.
- malandrew 10y ago
  Honestly, I don't think it necessarily has to be something in Bloomberg's original interest as a business-focused news outlet. In the past few years, individuals with a strong SJW mindset have infiltrated so many media outlets resulting in the promotion SJW values with near religious fervor. Look at other stories from this same author: https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/APuwLdDPlj8/peter-waldman https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/APuwLdDPlj8/peter-waldman According to his LinkedIn, his focus is on long-form investigative journalism for Bloomberg living in San Francisco. With this in mind, the question remains, why is it in Bloomberg's interest to have a writer like Peter Waldman? I suspect the reason is just to remain competitive for clicks with other news sources like HuffPo, Vox, etc. These days, Bloomberg isn't as focused on their original market as the WSJ or the FT.