3 ms·

Was this access to Zuck why the NYT silently changed their story to make Sandberg look less culpable yesterday? It worries me.

by harry8 9y ago

harry8 9y ago
I couldn't find the HN link. This was the story iirc. https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-quietly-delete-unflattering-reference-to-sheryl-sandberg-in-story-about-russian-trolls/ https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-qui... [edit] It had dropped a long way down https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16632743 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16632743
artemisyna 9y ago
The NYT's report update was becaese Alex Stamos tweeted pointing out how they were wrong. https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/975926737111367680 https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/975926737111367680 https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/976175174314635264 https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/976175174314635264 You'd think the news sites would maybe be a little bit more transparent given all this fake news rabble, but they can't even bother to update with primary sources apparently...
- mliker 9y ago
  I actually find it disturbing that Trump is kind-of right: NYTimes is #fakenews. :( What an age we live in.
  - azemetre 9y ago
    Newspapers and agencies issue retractions on stories all the time. Claiming that they are all fake news is massively disingenuous where you have other major media companies that don't make retractions at all.
- bogomipz 9y ago
  Yea and also the tweet doesn't contradict the original published content. "Losing a debate" and being "discouraged" are not mutually exclusive.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bogomipz 9y ago
Yes I just noticed this as well. The story originally said that Stamos has clashed with Sandberg over addressing the Russia issue. The sentence has now been completely removed. They did't even print a retraction. This is truly disturbing and more than a little ironic considering the context. Shame on them.

Was this access to Zuck why the NYT silently changed their story to make Sandberg look less culpable yesterday? It worries me.

by harry8 9y ago

Was this access to Zuck why the NYT silently changed their story to make Sandberg look less culpable yesterday? It worries me.

harry8 9y ago

I couldn't find the HN link. This was the story iirc. https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-quietly-delete-unflattering-reference-to-sheryl-sandberg-in-story-about-russian-trolls/ https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-qui... [edit] It had dropped a long way down https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16632743 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16632743

artemisyna 9y ago

The NYT's report update was becaese Alex Stamos tweeted pointing out how they were wrong. https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/975926737111367680 https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/975926737111367680 https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/976175174314635264 https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/976175174314635264 You'd think the news sites would maybe be a little bit more transparent given all this fake news rabble, but they can't even bother to update with primary sources apparently...

mliker 9y ago
I actually find it disturbing that Trump is kind-of right: NYTimes is #fakenews. :( What an age we live in.
- azemetre 9y ago
  Newspapers and agencies issue retractions on stories all the time. Claiming that they are all fake news is massively disingenuous where you have other major media companies that don't make retractions at all.
bogomipz 9y ago
Yea and also the tweet doesn't contradict the original published content. "Losing a debate" and being "discouraged" are not mutually exclusive.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

bogomipz 9y ago

Yes I just noticed this as well. The story originally said that Stamos has clashed with Sandberg over addressing the Russia issue. The sentence has now been completely removed. They did't even print a retraction. This is truly disturbing and more than a little ironic considering the context. Shame on them.