4 ms·

At the end of this it could turn out that Buzzfeed’s journalism is more reliable than Bloomberg’s, which would be a sad state of affairs.

judge2020 8y ago
I've found that Buzzfeed News is pretty alright, but the main Buzzfeed website is definitely something to stay away from.
- vaughnegut 8y ago
  I've always thought of regular BuzzFeed as a vehicle to fund BuzzFeed News
  - ambicapter 8y ago
    Since when does news make healthy margins? Its more like BuzzFeed News is there to provide a thin veneer of respectability to BuzzFeed.
    - cthalupa 8y ago
      >Since when does news make healthy margins? That's exactly his point. He's saying they always wanted to be legitimate news, but didn't have the money, so they built their war chest using clickbait.
    - astrange 8y ago
      > Since when does news make healthy margins? Most of the 20th century! Have you seen their expense accounts?
- notatoad 8y ago
  Buzzfeed has a legit investigative news division. their last highlight list is pretty impressive (in listicle form, because buzzfeed) https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/markschoofs/the-year-in-investigations https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/markschoofs/the-year-in...
  - makomk 8y ago
    On the other hand, some of their investigative articles are just long-form clickbait. I was particularly unimpressed with this one: https://www.buzzfeed.com/janebradley/scientist-who-helped-connect-litvinenkos-murder-to-the https://www.buzzfeed.com/janebradley/scientist-who-helped-co... They managed to write 30 breathless paragraphs about how the UK police were inexplicably treating what they claimed was the Russian murder of a key scientist in the Litvinenko investigation as a suicide, and that the police had mysteriously testified that “no-one in his family seemed particularly surprised he had taken his own life" even though some of his relatives had suggested foul play, before they thought to mention that he'd been showing signs of depression for some time, his wife said he'd tried to kill himself the week before, and there was no signs of foul play and no evidence anyone else was present. They then argued this shouldn't have ruled out foul play because he could've been given some kind of secret Russian mind control chemicals. Seriously. To make matters worse, from what I can tell he didn't even play the key role in the Litvinenko investigation that they claim he did. He merely recalculated Litvinenko's exposure in 2010 after it was discovered he was exposed twice rather than once - several years after all the announcements and further investigation the Buzzfeed story portrayed as a direct result of that work, and well after this had been clearly pinned on Russia. The original analysis was done by different scientists who are presumably still alive.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
tanilama 8y ago
Well, BuzzFeed some has really solid journalism from time to time of the highest quality, like the Palantir piece.

judge2020 8y ago

I've found that Buzzfeed News is pretty alright, but the main Buzzfeed website is definitely something to stay away from.

vaughnegut 8y ago
I've always thought of regular BuzzFeed as a vehicle to fund BuzzFeed News
- ambicapter 8y ago
  Since when does news make healthy margins? Its more like BuzzFeed News is there to provide a thin veneer of respectability to BuzzFeed.
  - cthalupa 8y ago
    >Since when does news make healthy margins? That's exactly his point. He's saying they always wanted to be legitimate news, but didn't have the money, so they built their war chest using clickbait.
  - astrange 8y ago
    > Since when does news make healthy margins? Most of the 20th century! Have you seen their expense accounts?
notatoad 8y ago
Buzzfeed has a legit investigative news division. their last highlight list is pretty impressive (in listicle form, because buzzfeed) https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/markschoofs/the-year-in-investigations https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/markschoofs/the-year-in...
- makomk 8y ago
  On the other hand, some of their investigative articles are just long-form clickbait. I was particularly unimpressed with this one: https://www.buzzfeed.com/janebradley/scientist-who-helped-connect-litvinenkos-murder-to-the https://www.buzzfeed.com/janebradley/scientist-who-helped-co... They managed to write 30 breathless paragraphs about how the UK police were inexplicably treating what they claimed was the Russian murder of a key scientist in the Litvinenko investigation as a suicide, and that the police had mysteriously testified that “no-one in his family seemed particularly surprised he had taken his own life" even though some of his relatives had suggested foul play, before they thought to mention that he'd been showing signs of depression for some time, his wife said he'd tried to kill himself the week before, and there was no signs of foul play and no evidence anyone else was present. They then argued this shouldn't have ruled out foul play because he could've been given some kind of secret Russian mind control chemicals. Seriously. To make matters worse, from what I can tell he didn't even play the key role in the Litvinenko investigation that they claim he did. He merely recalculated Litvinenko's exposure in 2010 after it was discovered he was exposed twice rather than once - several years after all the announcements and further investigation the Buzzfeed story portrayed as a direct result of that work, and well after this had been clearly pinned on Russia. The original analysis was done by different scientists who are presumably still alive.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

tanilama 8y ago

Well, BuzzFeed some has really solid journalism from time to time of the highest quality, like the Palantir piece.