3 ms·

> In particular, Michael is reported to have singled out PandoDaily editor-in-chief Sarah Lacy, suggesting that he already knew something about her and could ha

> In particular, Michael is reported to have singled out PandoDaily editor-in-chief Sarah Lacy, suggesting that he already knew something about her and could have his team of journalists confirm it. First article. It's basically creating chilling effects against reporting against Uber. I'm sure every journalist, and every person, has done something they wouldn't want to wind up in an article of the New York Times - and unless a company like Uber goes up against them, those things almost always don't.

yawaworht12 10y ago
That's editorializing, not blackmail. Here's an alternate account of that conversation by someone else that was at the dinner that suggests that it was a completely different conversation than was portrayed: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6198250 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6198250 I did some more research and it turns out Ben works for Buzzfeed, which shortly before that conversation got a $50 million investment from A16Z, which is one of the biggest investors in Lyft. I'm not suggesting Lyft is the one playing dirty here but given all the money Andreessen has poured into journalists I wouldn't be surprised. VCs generally operate on the "no conflict, no interest maxim".
- yawaworht12 10y ago
  Went down the rabbit whole even further and it turns out Andreessen is the first and largest investor shareholder in PandoMedia/PandoDaily with 8%: https://pando.com/about/ https://pando.com/about/ That's the media company that Emil was talking about at dinner. Does it not strike you as odd that one of the most vociferous critics of Uber years ago also has as a primary shareholder, Lyfts's biggest shareholder? This isn't an excuse of things that have happened at Uber, but I definitely think these conflicts of interest should be receiving a lot more scrutiny since you can make any company look bad by just dedicating more resources to investigating it and painting everything you find in the worst light possible (like what happens with Apple)

yawaworht12 10y ago

That's editorializing, not blackmail. Here's an alternate account of that conversation by someone else that was at the dinner that suggests that it was a completely different conversation than was portrayed: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6198250 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6198250 I did some more research and it turns out Ben works for Buzzfeed, which shortly before that conversation got a $50 million investment from A16Z, which is one of the biggest investors in Lyft. I'm not suggesting Lyft is the one playing dirty here but given all the money Andreessen has poured into journalists I wouldn't be surprised. VCs generally operate on the "no conflict, no interest maxim".

yawaworht12 10y ago
Went down the rabbit whole even further and it turns out Andreessen is the first and largest investor shareholder in PandoMedia/PandoDaily with 8%: https://pando.com/about/ https://pando.com/about/ That's the media company that Emil was talking about at dinner. Does it not strike you as odd that one of the most vociferous critics of Uber years ago also has as a primary shareholder, Lyfts's biggest shareholder? This isn't an excuse of things that have happened at Uber, but I definitely think these conflicts of interest should be receiving a lot more scrutiny since you can make any company look bad by just dedicating more resources to investigating it and painting everything you find in the worst light possible (like what happens with Apple)