4 ms·

We can tell that the tone is authentic. The language doesn't hedge. It makes clear, verifiable claims about the facts of the situation. If they are lying, we wi

by darawk 9y ago

We can tell that the tone is authentic. The language doesn't hedge. It makes clear, verifiable claims about the facts of the situation. If they are lying, we will almost certainly find out in the trial process. An inauthentic message would be one that hedges and avoids making specific, falsifiable claims. We perceive this tone as authentic because it makes claims that an uncertain or lying PR department wouldn't have the nerve, authority, or legal standing to make. In that way, it is an unforgeable signal. Of course it's possible to forge in the moment, but then it makes your situation 100x worse when you inevitably get called out later. Which is why people afraid of being called out later can't do it.

watwut 9y ago
How do you know the tone is authentic? People who lie are very good at looking confident. That is how it works. And being totally certain about whether fuzzy incident happened/not happened usually means you are aware of peoples bias toward looking confident - or that you jumped to conclusion without really investigating all the conflicting evidence.
- darawk 9y ago
  Like I said, in my original comment, if you are a rational actor and you did mess up in a circumstance like this, you have two options: You can own up to it, or you can lie. If you're going to lie, you have two options: Use vague language and make fuzzy assertions, or confidently, directly, and clearly make counter-claims. If you were at fault, and there is a pending legal case, pursuing option two will inevitably lead to your exposure not only for the original wrongdoing, but for lying about it later. Any rational actor evaluating their options would play this through and realize this. Therefore, we can conclude either Elon is so divorced from reality that he doesn't care about the obvious negative consequences, or, that he is being authentic in his messaging here. And while Elon certainly may be off in his own little world in a number of ways, I personally don't think he's crazy enough to outright lie in a message like this.
  - watwut 9y ago
    It is blog post and email, most likely scrutinized by PR experts. Written to sound convincing, because it is the goal and the job of people writing it. Nothing wrong with that. It is not something sent to court, so your rational actor theories based on judge punishing them don't apply. It is also very general, so there is not all that much judge would punish them for, even if untrue. (Unless they would lie about dude being contractor, but there is literally zero reason to lie about that as it is mostly irrelevant.) There is not much specific that you could make inferences from, but there are general claims truth for majority of lawsuits phrased as something specific (trials being expensive, tesla employing contractor). The rest is words made to make you feel good for working for Tesla (little company fighting good cause surrounded by ennemies). Again, this does not prove anything related to lawsuit, but it is PR in action - if it is either insincere or cultish. Either way, it is PR nothing else.
    - jaxwerk 9y ago
      > It is blog post and email, most likely scrutinized by PR experts. Written to sound convincing, because it is the goal and the job of people writing it. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone above is on the same page here. This is PR. Why keep re-stating this? > It is not something sent to court, so your rational actor theories based on judge punishing them don't apply. Who claimed that a judge would punish lies in this piece? Those above you are referring to the "court of public opinion", not legal ramifications. If Tesla's claims here are disproven in court, this piece gives the media a lot of ammunition to use to lambast Tesla with later. > It is also very general, so there is not all that much judge would punish them for, even if untrue. (Unless they would lie about dude being contractor, but there is literally zero reason to lie about that as it is mostly irrelevant.) The piece makes several assertions that are quite specific. Number of people involved in the situation, circumstances of termination of the plaintiff and, importantly, asserting that the actions taken were right and just, leaving them no graceful way to backtrack later and claim that the actions on the part of the company were a mistake and the fault of some individuals who can be thrown under the bus. > There is not much specific that you could make inferences from, but there are general claims truth for majority of lawsuits phrased as something specific (trials being expensive, tesla employing contractor). There are specific claims made. No inferences required. See my point above for examples of claims that I think are particularly impactful. > The rest is words made to make you feel good for working for Tesla (little company fighting good cause surrounded by ennemies). So you are thinking this is a fluffy PR piece with language that doesn't convey much information but placates the reader? I'd like to see examples of what you're reading there that strikes you as platitudinous. > Again, this does not prove anything related to lawsuit, Nobody is claiming that this piece proves anything. It simply makes claims which will then need to be proven in court. > but it is PR in action - if it is either insincere or cultish. What about this piece strikes you as insincere or cultish? Nothing about this piece seems crafted to rally folks on brand loyalty or warped worldview. > Either way, it is PR nothing else. That's been established. Repeatedly. Everyone above you has agreed that this is PR. We're just saying that it's good PR.
- CodeWriter23 9y ago
  This isn’t a stare down at your local pub. Tesla committed to stating as fact what happened. If they are lying about it, any judge will rake them over the coals. For lying. They would likely lose this case for lying. And let’s watch how the plaintiff’s attorney doesn’t turn around a file a defamation suit.

by darawk 9y ago

watwut 9y ago

How do you know the tone is authentic? People who lie are very good at looking confident. That is how it works. And being totally certain about whether fuzzy incident happened/not happened usually means you are aware of peoples bias toward looking confident - or that you jumped to conclusion without really investigating all the conflicting evidence.

darawk 9y ago
Like I said, in my original comment, if you are a rational actor and you did mess up in a circumstance like this, you have two options: You can own up to it, or you can lie. If you're going to lie, you have two options: Use vague language and make fuzzy assertions, or confidently, directly, and clearly make counter-claims. If you were at fault, and there is a pending legal case, pursuing option two will inevitably lead to your exposure not only for the original wrongdoing, but for lying about it later. Any rational actor evaluating their options would play this through and realize this. Therefore, we can conclude either Elon is so divorced from reality that he doesn't care about the obvious negative consequences, or, that he is being authentic in his messaging here. And while Elon certainly may be off in his own little world in a number of ways, I personally don't think he's crazy enough to outright lie in a message like this.
- watwut 9y ago
  It is blog post and email, most likely scrutinized by PR experts. Written to sound convincing, because it is the goal and the job of people writing it. Nothing wrong with that. It is not something sent to court, so your rational actor theories based on judge punishing them don't apply. It is also very general, so there is not all that much judge would punish them for, even if untrue. (Unless they would lie about dude being contractor, but there is literally zero reason to lie about that as it is mostly irrelevant.) There is not much specific that you could make inferences from, but there are general claims truth for majority of lawsuits phrased as something specific (trials being expensive, tesla employing contractor). The rest is words made to make you feel good for working for Tesla (little company fighting good cause surrounded by ennemies). Again, this does not prove anything related to lawsuit, but it is PR in action - if it is either insincere or cultish. Either way, it is PR nothing else.
  - jaxwerk 9y ago
    > It is blog post and email, most likely scrutinized by PR experts. Written to sound convincing, because it is the goal and the job of people writing it. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone above is on the same page here. This is PR. Why keep re-stating this? > It is not something sent to court, so your rational actor theories based on judge punishing them don't apply. Who claimed that a judge would punish lies in this piece? Those above you are referring to the "court of public opinion", not legal ramifications. If Tesla's claims here are disproven in court, this piece gives the media a lot of ammunition to use to lambast Tesla with later. > It is also very general, so there is not all that much judge would punish them for, even if untrue. (Unless they would lie about dude being contractor, but there is literally zero reason to lie about that as it is mostly irrelevant.) The piece makes several assertions that are quite specific. Number of people involved in the situation, circumstances of termination of the plaintiff and, importantly, asserting that the actions taken were right and just, leaving them no graceful way to backtrack later and claim that the actions on the part of the company were a mistake and the fault of some individuals who can be thrown under the bus. > There is not much specific that you could make inferences from, but there are general claims truth for majority of lawsuits phrased as something specific (trials being expensive, tesla employing contractor). There are specific claims made. No inferences required. See my point above for examples of claims that I think are particularly impactful. > The rest is words made to make you feel good for working for Tesla (little company fighting good cause surrounded by ennemies). So you are thinking this is a fluffy PR piece with language that doesn't convey much information but placates the reader? I'd like to see examples of what you're reading there that strikes you as platitudinous. > Again, this does not prove anything related to lawsuit, Nobody is claiming that this piece proves anything. It simply makes claims which will then need to be proven in court. > but it is PR in action - if it is either insincere or cultish. What about this piece strikes you as insincere or cultish? Nothing about this piece seems crafted to rally folks on brand loyalty or warped worldview. > Either way, it is PR nothing else. That's been established. Repeatedly. Everyone above you has agreed that this is PR. We're just saying that it's good PR.
CodeWriter23 9y ago
This isn’t a stare down at your local pub. Tesla committed to stating as fact what happened. If they are lying about it, any judge will rake them over the coals. For lying. They would likely lose this case for lying. And let’s watch how the plaintiff’s attorney doesn’t turn around a file a defamation suit.