7 ms·

I cringe when I read such Trumpian tweets from a founder. The journalist reached out a few times and the response was unclear. So he writes his piece with a pre

• curiousgal 9y ago
  >The journalist So journalists conduct their interviews in 140-character messages nowadays? I can't help but agree with the co-founder that hit-pieces should be based on actual interviews, not a Twitter conversation, ff we're going to consider this as journalism of course. If it's just amateurish blogging then I guess that would pass.
  • chii 9y ago
    how hard is it for the founder to answer a yes or no question over twitter? Dodging it by saying they are like other OBC is basically an admission that they aren't legally protecting their carriers. If they had made known that they don't claim legal liability _at all_, then i would be fine with their service.
    • StavrosK 9y ago
      How hard is it for the author to say "I'm writing a piece on you and would like some clarification on some points"? He never told them he was writing a piece and gave them a chance to read it or comment, AFAICT.
      • FRex 9y ago
        I see, schrödinger companies. The answer to a question (that isn't any company secret but a simple question) is totally different depending on you being a client vs. being a journalist.
        • StavrosK 9y ago
          I don't so much see the answer as being totally different as I see the amount of effort going into the answer varying wildly.
          • thanksgiving 9y ago
            Should Consumer Review disclose the fact that they will review the car when they buy a car from a dealership?
            • StavrosK 9y ago
              The author didn't review the service, he basically assumed many things about the inner workings and didn't give the company a chance to clarify. Consumer Review doesn't have to disclose the fact that they will review a car when they buy it from a dealership, but they probably should ask GM to comment when they say "it seems to us, without having driven one or heard from anyone who has driven one, that GM are making their cars so they explode on impact".
              • thanksgiving 9y ago
                > Consumer Review doesn't have to disclose the fact that they will review a car when they buy it from a dealership, but they probably should ask GM to comment when they say "it seems to us, without having driven one or heard from anyone who has driven one, that GM are making their cars so they explode on impact". Do they have to disclose that they are Consumer Review when they talk to GM?
      • bogomipz 9y ago
        Or the CEO of Airmule could have take a few seconds to look at the Twitter profile of the user asking questions before responding publicly. The Twtitter profile for user @TPrphet states that he is a blogger for a site called Seat31B. Also the blogger may not have had any intention of writing a blog post prior to the exchange.
        • tprophet 9y ago
          As a startup founder myself, I don't take writing a negative post about another startup lightly. That being said, I always reserve the right to blog about anything I think is interesting or important to my readers, and this subject meets the bar given the seriousness of the potential consequences here. "Move fast and break things" is something you can do in a social app but lives are potentially at stake here. It's also fair for me to move quickly. Airmule is out in public advertising $99 flights to Beijing right now. Why should I have to wait until Rory is back in the office on Monday to write about it? It's fairly normal to write blog posts without interviewing anyone. If the facts are clear, why spend the time? There isn't a law that says that I have to schedule an interview with an airline before I blog about their economy class cabin, and there isn't a law that says I have to schedule an interview with a startup founder around his backyard tile laying project and Costco shopping trip. Note that my readers are largely young backpackers - think the /r/shoestring and /r/solotravel crowd. I would have written an entirely different blog post--and one that the founder would have been completely happy with--if the answers had been different. It's unfortunate that they weren't.
          • bogomipz 9y ago
            I wasn't even remotely defending Airmule in my comment, just the opposite. Maybe you should reread my comment and it's context as a response to the OP?
            • tprophet 9y ago
              Relax, I'm not going after you - this is part of a broader conversation. :)
          • 9y ago
    • curiousgal 9y ago
      Even if he answered that question directly, I still think it wouldn't be enough as material to base a story on. How hard wouldn't it have been for "the journalist" to reach out for the co-founder for an interview?
      • anjc 9y ago
        He wasn't writing an interview so it doesn't matter how hard it'd have been.
      • pducks32 9y ago
        So if I wanted to write a HN comment based on a question I had for the founder that I posted on Twitter, would I be doing a potential hit piece? Should I have scheduled a interview? This is the internet: we're all in some ways journalists in your terms.
      • DonHopkins 9y ago
        The real story is that the founder refused to give a straight answer to a simple, explicit "yes or no" question when directly and repeatedly asked. Where there's smoke there's fire! His non-answer shows he knows there's a problem, and he's actively trying to deflect attention away from it.
        • sokoloff 9y ago
          Have you stopped beating your significant other? I just need a simple, explicit "yes or no". Not every question that can conceivably return a bool answer should be answered that way in PR.
          • Panoramix 9y ago
            That's a trivial thing, you would simply categorically deny the implicit accusation. But his answer instead did not come even close, it was "I have stopped about the same as other people".
          • chii 9y ago
            > Have you stopped beating your significant other? that's an unfair comparison, because this is a loaded question (implying you were beating your SO). The question being asked in the blogpost is asking for clarification, with no assumption behind it.
    • camillomiller 9y ago
      It's true, but this is not the tone you would write a journalistically sound article with. Let's just call it what it is. It's blogging, it's great and sometimes even more effective of what we journalist can achieve, but it indeed has different standards. My personal opinion is that the Twitter interaction was enough as a comment. If that's the case, tho, I wouldn't report anything more than strictly necessary, i.e. Co-Founder answered on twitter like this, failing to clarify my question. No further comments, no innuendos to unsaid liabilities.
    • tajen 9y ago
      The founder just doesn't understand the risk, hence this behavior. He's the average victim who would fall for a $99 fare. He certainly can't believe the risk would be that high, hence he's upset with "a hit piece"; He probably just read a bit on the internet about what it means to be OBC. He may not even have a lawyer and it could be a side project. They describe themselves as average bros, probably not because they've thought it through for marketing reasons, but just because that's their identity. Simple guys organizing something cool, patching a genius opportunity that no-one has taken before, and targeted ad hominem by a blogger. He just can't understand it any other way.
      • kccqzy 9y ago
        Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by ignorance, indeed.
  • csomar 9y ago
    The whole article is based on a single, short and simple question. I don't think the blogger is looking to interview him; or really want/need to.
  • nolok 9y ago
    "Do the carrier has legal protection from the content of airmule bag", thus making him not responsible if it's filled with heroin, is a yes/no question. Anything longer than that, or running in circle refusing a clear answer, should be interpreted as "no" by the users, which is what the article says.
• rmc 9y ago
  > Caveat emptor The hell with that, the company should be shut down. Some poor soul will think it's a sweet deal. They're putting people at risk of the death penalty without telling them and implying everyone is A-OK.
  • sneak 9y ago
    No, the harm comes from government agents. They are the guilty party. One step removed from that, the decisions of the courier to take such risks. Finally, AirMule. You've doubly-undirected the responsibility for the harm being done.
    • vertex-four 9y ago
      AirMule are informing the second party (the "mule") that there is no risk. Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? And how exactly is it the fault of the person you've intentionally lied to that they believed your lie? The ethical thing to say, in big, bold writing, is "we check as thoroughly as possible, but we can't be absolutely certain there's nothing illegal in the bag, and you're responsible to the authorities - to the extent of a potential death sentence - if that happens". In fact, this is hidden away all the way at the bottom of the terms and conditions! Of course, if they did that then they wouldn't have any customers. You can be ethical in the presence of other unethical actors - that the Government may or may not be unethical does not change whether your activities are ethical.
      • rmc 9y ago
        > AirMule are informing the second party (the "mule") that there is no risk. Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? disruption!
      • Fnoord 9y ago
        > In fact, this is hidden away all the way at the bottom of the terms and conditions! Or not bottom but slightly above the bottom, since people may skim through and read first and last part only as a matter of verification. > Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? I suppose its a survival of the fittest, to get rid of those humans ignorant or poor enough to deal with this. Would it pass the Darwin Awards though? And don't make the mistake that this business practice goes right for an X amount of times. A scammer on eBay can have hundreds of positive feedback before his exit strategy. As for the "These guys totally have you covered." in the original article, I wouldn't want to do business with someone who's manner of first impression is to advertises themselves as a hardcore gamer, a dancer (with that stale face), and a beer drinker. Doesn't give me confidence at all!
• smokedoutraider 9y ago
  I cringe when someone uses the term Trumpian to describe a tone of voice they disagree with.