4 ms·

I'm not at all a fan of Uber, but at this point it seems like a coordinated smear campaign.

by 67726e 10y ago

hhw 10y ago
I think a lot of people have always had a negative view of Travis Kalanick and Uber's business practices, but they enjoyed the convenience of the service just enough to look the other way. Between the soaring valuation and recent events, that balance has shifted to the point where some people now refuse to use the service. At the same time, there is a lot of schadenfreude by people who disagree either with the valuation, or Travis Kalanick and the company's ethos. The media is just tapping into this interest with their coverage, as is their nature to do. So if anything, I'd say it's more like karmic retribution than a coordinated smear campaign.
- sillysaurus3 10y ago
  How quickly history is rewritten. This is the same company that presented at Startup School several years ago to significant applause.
  - amazingman 10y ago
    >How quickly history is rewritten. This is the same company that presented at Startup School several years ago to significant applause. This is completely unrelated to Uber's cultural and ethical problems.
    - sillysaurus3 10y ago
      The comment was "I think a lot of people have always had a negative view of Travis Kalanick and Uber's business practices, but they enjoyed the convenience of the service just enough to look the other way." My comment was "Actually, that's not true."
  - hhw 10y ago
    I think there may be a disconnect between the "a lot of people" I'm referring to, and who you may have in mind. I'm referring to people at large who are aware enough of technology to follow who Uber is, and observed their business practices and Kalanick's predilection for libertarianism. You would seem to be referring to a much more select demographic, such as those who would have been in attendance at Startup School.
    - sillysaurus3 10y ago
      Good point!
Apocryphon 10y ago
It's not a smear campaign; it's a feeding frenzy. When public perception shifts one way or another, the stories follow to cover it in that angle (though you'd expect at some point there'd be some contrarian hot takes that take an apologist stance towards Uber, maybe something like "Don't blame Uber. Blame the tech industry/gig economy/etc."). There's something rotten at the company, so journalists will naturally shift to cover it and dig up every juice piece of mud they can rake. Same thing happened to RIM a few years back. None of this is personal. It's just a domino effect.
- 67726e 10y ago
  Hadn't even considered that. Suppose the results are the same either way.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
decker 10y ago
Doubt that, Uber became a company that's popular to hate, and any negative news on the company is going to get a lot of eyeballs.
amazingman 10y ago
Or, you know, their culture really is that toxic, their ethics really are that terrible, and Kalanick really is a hyper-libertarian jerk. The first claim is what catalyzed the latest spate of bad press, but there have been many, many examples of the latter 2 claims over the past few years. All you have to do is browse to your favorite search engine and use it.
- angry-hacker 10y ago
  And you can find hundreds of CEO's with the same characteristics. I hate uber for breaking the laws and calling it disruption, but obviously media smells the blood and this attack gets s lot of attention and pageviews so they keep pouring the oil to fire.
  - amazingman 10y ago
    Good. I'm tired of there being so many positive feedback loops for individuals and companies practicing bad/malicious ethics, and/or failing at even the most basic compassion/egalitarianism.

I'm not at all a fan of Uber, but at this point it seems like a coordinated smear campaign.

by 67726e 10y ago

I'm not at all a fan of Uber, but at this point it seems like a coordinated smear campaign.

hhw 10y ago

I think a lot of people have always had a negative view of Travis Kalanick and Uber's business practices, but they enjoyed the convenience of the service just enough to look the other way. Between the soaring valuation and recent events, that balance has shifted to the point where some people now refuse to use the service. At the same time, there is a lot of schadenfreude by people who disagree either with the valuation, or Travis Kalanick and the company's ethos. The media is just tapping into this interest with their coverage, as is their nature to do. So if anything, I'd say it's more like karmic retribution than a coordinated smear campaign.

sillysaurus3 10y ago
How quickly history is rewritten. This is the same company that presented at Startup School several years ago to significant applause.
- amazingman 10y ago
  >How quickly history is rewritten. This is the same company that presented at Startup School several years ago to significant applause. This is completely unrelated to Uber's cultural and ethical problems.
  - sillysaurus3 10y ago
    The comment was "I think a lot of people have always had a negative view of Travis Kalanick and Uber's business practices, but they enjoyed the convenience of the service just enough to look the other way." My comment was "Actually, that's not true."
- hhw 10y ago
  I think there may be a disconnect between the "a lot of people" I'm referring to, and who you may have in mind. I'm referring to people at large who are aware enough of technology to follow who Uber is, and observed their business practices and Kalanick's predilection for libertarianism. You would seem to be referring to a much more select demographic, such as those who would have been in attendance at Startup School.
  - sillysaurus3 10y ago
    Good point!

Apocryphon 10y ago

It's not a smear campaign; it's a feeding frenzy. When public perception shifts one way or another, the stories follow to cover it in that angle (though you'd expect at some point there'd be some contrarian hot takes that take an apologist stance towards Uber, maybe something like "Don't blame Uber. Blame the tech industry/gig economy/etc."). There's something rotten at the company, so journalists will naturally shift to cover it and dig up every juice piece of mud they can rake. Same thing happened to RIM a few years back. None of this is personal. It's just a domino effect.

67726e 10y ago
Hadn't even considered that. Suppose the results are the same either way.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

decker 10y ago

Doubt that, Uber became a company that's popular to hate, and any negative news on the company is going to get a lot of eyeballs.

amazingman 10y ago

Or, you know, their culture really is that toxic, their ethics really are that terrible, and Kalanick really is a hyper-libertarian jerk. The first claim is what catalyzed the latest spate of bad press, but there have been many, many examples of the latter 2 claims over the past few years. All you have to do is browse to your favorite search engine and use it.

angry-hacker 10y ago
And you can find hundreds of CEO's with the same characteristics. I hate uber for breaking the laws and calling it disruption, but obviously media smells the blood and this attack gets s lot of attention and pageviews so they keep pouring the oil to fire.
- amazingman 10y ago
  Good. I'm tired of there being so many positive feedback loops for individuals and companies practicing bad/malicious ethics, and/or failing at even the most basic compassion/egalitarianism.