11 ms·

And how am I supposed to figure out who to trust? Reporters say Tesla is shitty. But reporters often lie and even more often exaggerate. Musk says he cares ab

by _cs2017_ 8y ago

And how am I supposed to figure out who to trust? Reporters say Tesla is shitty. But reporters often lie and even more often exaggerate. Musk says he cares about safety and all accusations are wrong. But CEOs often lie and even more often are uninformed or delusional. If anyone has advice about how I can develop some trust in one side or the other, please let me know.

JacKTrocinskI 8y ago
What does the author of this article have to gain, or rather, why do you think she would fraudulently write an article on this topic?
- bigzyg33k 8y ago
  Views. That's primary reason reporters exaggerate news, controversy has a monetary benefit. (This doesn't necessarily mean that the reporter in question here is exaggerating, however)
  - TarpitCarnivore 8y ago
    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Reveal is an independent nonprofit organization. The idea that you would prescribe to "clicks" as a justification for not trusting their reporting is a very damning thing to me. For a site that prides itself on it's intellect and knowledge, it's unsettling how often I'm seeing people jump to "fake news" type of commenting.
  - klingebeil 8y ago
    As someone working in the media business. Please could you at least google the outlet you‘re talking about? You‘re embarrassing yourself with your own ignorance. Reveal is a non-profit. They don‘t care about page views, because they don‘t need advertising to finance themselves. There‘s only one thing an investigative journalism team cares about and that‘s reputation. They are deeply incentivized against publishing half-assed work or missinformation. Please just stop repeating this meme over and over that journalists only care about page views.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- _cs2017_ 8y ago
  Just like any other professional, a reporter may want to do a good job (because of dedication to their work, desire for fame, career ambitions, etc). And that means publishing an important story. That desire may push them to look for evidence where there's none, and humans are good at making themselves and others come to the wrong conclusions in such situations. By the way, this also explains why prosecutors sometimes lie or exaggerate. Furthermore, some reporters want to influence public opinion in a certain way because of their personal beliefs or peer pressure. I do not claim any of this applies to Reveal. I just want to point out why money from views isn't the only mechanism for misleading reporting. A really good news organization may create pressure against reporters overstepping the bounds in pursuit of a story. But IMO it takes an incredible effort to counteract the human tendency to bend the facts to help make a point. Of course, CEOs have even more obvious reasons to mislead people: maintainging good corporate and personal image. This is compounded by the fear subordinates have in telling the CEO that they are wrong. Also, the more successful the person, the more likely they are to be a bit delusional by believing everything they do is right, and ignoring any criticism.
larkeith 8y ago
Trust the sources and the quotes - while it is possible (though unethical) to mislead with quotes or data, “There was a strong push not to send anybody in an ambulance" is rather context-independent. And generally speaking, if it's to the point of multiple articles written on a subject, there's almost certainly a fair amount of truth there.
- taf2 8y ago
  I would guess given the news climate against tesla that that strong push was intended to avoid attention.
  - tareqak 8y ago
    Now, Tesla is dealing with the Streisand effect. I can see ramping electric car production to levels comparable to conventional car production to definitely be challenging, but what part of Tesla’s manufacturing process is necessarily more unsafe compared to conventional car manufacturing? After reading this article, I’m of the opinion that Tesla is intentionally trying lowball their workplace injury numbers. The article mentions 48 were reported, but the fired medical professional says the actual number was probably twice as much. Let’s say that this estimated actual number is indeed true and there were 96 actual injuries. How many factory employees does Tesla have compared to and conventional car factory and what are injury rates there (pick something in the same state to keep workplace injury laws the same). It makes no sense to me to underreport this number and risk serious repercussions as opposed to report accurately, give injures employees sufficient medical care and support, and improve the manufacturing process thereby reducing the rate of injuries. Yes, Tesla is burning a lot of money, and doing the right thing would cost them more. The question is how much more compared to the risk of getting caught underreporting. This entire situation reeks of “Move fast and break things” applied ad nauseum to where Tesla is becoming its own worst enemy as opposed to its short sellers.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Which if true is a terrible plan.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
tallanvor 8y ago
Can you name an example where this news organization (Center for Investigative Reporting) has lied? If not, the fact that it has won a number of widely recognized rewards and has received a MacArthur grant should give you confidence that the reporters have been careful in their investigation and reporting.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  Whether or not they lied is in the end an implementation detail - a skilled amoral persuader doesn't need to lie to mislead. The toolbox for that includes being biased in what facts you mention, making "mistakes," and using your own words to connect the wrong dots (basically every way to introduce an error can be abused). Tesla claims that the reporters are focusing on a healthcare provider that they cut ties with while ignoring what they are actually doing at present - which is one example of what you could do to make your readers believe wrong things without lying.
  - salvar 8y ago
    All right then, can you name an example where this news organization (Center for Investigative Reporting) has misled readers to make them believe the wrong things?
    - whatshisface 8y ago
      There's no point in being a less sophisticated reader than you can be. You should never be ignorant about the techniques that dishonest writers can use to fool you, no matter what you are reading.
      - Buldak 8y ago
        Justifying a presumptive skepticism of reporting on Tesla with such a nebulous pronouncement as "but reporters often lie ..." is pretty much the opposite of "sophisticated."
    - eduah 8y ago
Cthulhu_ 8y ago
You don't, really; there's so many major stakeholders that have an interest in raising or lowering Tesla's stocks, both of which will spend millions to get articles like these published - and shills / trolls to bombard the HN comments with remarks supporting or going against the article and subject.
mgoetzke 8y ago
Well the person in charge of safety at Tesla, Laurie Shelby (https://www.linkedin.com/in/laurie-shelby-cih-csp-8142435/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/laurie-shelby-cih-csp-8142435/), worked at Alcoa before (https://www.businessinsider.com/how-changing-one-habit-quintupled-alcoas-income-2014-4?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/how-changing-one-habit-quint...). Alcoa has a pretty good track record in actually caring. Gaining true knowledge about a situation is not possible without establishing a chain of trust. Whose reporting do you trust ? Each person in the chain needs to be evaluated individually and re-evaluated when new information comes to light. Right now I rather trust what Tesla says when I hear horrendous claims like until proven otherwise. Especially since news media are not independent. They rely almost entirely on advertisement which is a direct relation to "most eyeballs moved away from other 'free' options", which is directly related to the impact of the headline.
josefresco 8y ago
"But reporters often lie" Do you have any evidence to back this up? Citations, studies showing reporters lie .. often?
Dravorek 8y ago
Maybe try to see which one of the two has been sued for libel and/or successfully sued and sanctioned for making false statements on twitter. That might be a decent first approximation.
QuantumGood 8y ago
I diagram the points and counterpoints in a Hacker News thread like this one and determine which seem sufficiently documented and which need additional research. Very important to not put too much weight on points for which there are no counterpoints or significant supporting research regardless of initial "plausibility"
camtarn 8y ago
On the one side, you have a prizewinning independent nonprofit news organisation. And on the other side you have a guy who is stepping down as Tesla CEO after fraud charges, and who's being sued for losing his temper and calling some random cave-diver a paedophile, twice. Personally I trust the news organisation more.
- jsight 8y ago
  Elon Musk is not stepping down as CEO.
  - aembleton 8y ago
    Stepping down as chair but the point still stands.
    - camtarn 8y ago
      Ah, yes. I misread the SEC announcement. Thanks for clarification!
jsight 8y ago
Trust the regulators. They have less of a stake in this than the CEO (who purportedly hates yellow) or the writer (the company that purports the CEO hates yellow). The regulators will insure that corrections take place if the company is really misidentifying, mistreating, and underreporting injuries.
RivieraKid 8y ago
There were two Twitter threads by high-level people at Reveal, defending their Tesla articles. I found them convincing, I have no doubt that Reveal is honest. On the other hand, Elon is notorious to lie and mislead.

JacKTrocinskI 8y ago

What does the author of this article have to gain, or rather, why do you think she would fraudulently write an article on this topic?

bigzyg33k 8y ago
Views. That's primary reason reporters exaggerate news, controversy has a monetary benefit. (This doesn't necessarily mean that the reporter in question here is exaggerating, however)
- TarpitCarnivore 8y ago
  Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Reveal is an independent nonprofit organization. The idea that you would prescribe to "clicks" as a justification for not trusting their reporting is a very damning thing to me. For a site that prides itself on it's intellect and knowledge, it's unsettling how often I'm seeing people jump to "fake news" type of commenting.
- klingebeil 8y ago
  As someone working in the media business. Please could you at least google the outlet you‘re talking about? You‘re embarrassing yourself with your own ignorance. Reveal is a non-profit. They don‘t care about page views, because they don‘t need advertising to finance themselves. There‘s only one thing an investigative journalism team cares about and that‘s reputation. They are deeply incentivized against publishing half-assed work or missinformation. Please just stop repeating this meme over and over that journalists only care about page views.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
_cs2017_ 8y ago
Just like any other professional, a reporter may want to do a good job (because of dedication to their work, desire for fame, career ambitions, etc). And that means publishing an important story. That desire may push them to look for evidence where there's none, and humans are good at making themselves and others come to the wrong conclusions in such situations. By the way, this also explains why prosecutors sometimes lie or exaggerate. Furthermore, some reporters want to influence public opinion in a certain way because of their personal beliefs or peer pressure. I do not claim any of this applies to Reveal. I just want to point out why money from views isn't the only mechanism for misleading reporting. A really good news organization may create pressure against reporters overstepping the bounds in pursuit of a story. But IMO it takes an incredible effort to counteract the human tendency to bend the facts to help make a point. Of course, CEOs have even more obvious reasons to mislead people: maintainging good corporate and personal image. This is compounded by the fear subordinates have in telling the CEO that they are wrong. Also, the more successful the person, the more likely they are to be a bit delusional by believing everything they do is right, and ignoring any criticism.

larkeith 8y ago

Trust the sources and the quotes - while it is possible (though unethical) to mislead with quotes or data, “There was a strong push not to send anybody in an ambulance" is rather context-independent. And generally speaking, if it's to the point of multiple articles written on a subject, there's almost certainly a fair amount of truth there.

taf2 8y ago
I would guess given the news climate against tesla that that strong push was intended to avoid attention.
- tareqak 8y ago
  Now, Tesla is dealing with the Streisand effect. I can see ramping electric car production to levels comparable to conventional car production to definitely be challenging, but what part of Tesla’s manufacturing process is necessarily more unsafe compared to conventional car manufacturing? After reading this article, I’m of the opinion that Tesla is intentionally trying lowball their workplace injury numbers. The article mentions 48 were reported, but the fired medical professional says the actual number was probably twice as much. Let’s say that this estimated actual number is indeed true and there were 96 actual injuries. How many factory employees does Tesla have compared to and conventional car factory and what are injury rates there (pick something in the same state to keep workplace injury laws the same). It makes no sense to me to underreport this number and risk serious repercussions as opposed to report accurately, give injures employees sufficient medical care and support, and improve the manufacturing process thereby reducing the rate of injuries. Yes, Tesla is burning a lot of money, and doing the right thing would cost them more. The question is how much more compared to the risk of getting caught underreporting. This entire situation reeks of “Move fast and break things” applied ad nauseum to where Tesla is becoming its own worst enemy as opposed to its short sellers.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  Which if true is a terrible plan.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

tallanvor 8y ago

Can you name an example where this news organization (Center for Investigative Reporting) has lied? If not, the fact that it has won a number of widely recognized rewards and has received a MacArthur grant should give you confidence that the reporters have been careful in their investigation and reporting.

whatshisface 8y ago
Whether or not they lied is in the end an implementation detail - a skilled amoral persuader doesn't need to lie to mislead. The toolbox for that includes being biased in what facts you mention, making "mistakes," and using your own words to connect the wrong dots (basically every way to introduce an error can be abused). Tesla claims that the reporters are focusing on a healthcare provider that they cut ties with while ignoring what they are actually doing at present - which is one example of what you could do to make your readers believe wrong things without lying.
- salvar 8y ago
  All right then, can you name an example where this news organization (Center for Investigative Reporting) has misled readers to make them believe the wrong things?
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    There's no point in being a less sophisticated reader than you can be. You should never be ignorant about the techniques that dishonest writers can use to fool you, no matter what you are reading.
    - Buldak 8y ago
      Justifying a presumptive skepticism of reporting on Tesla with such a nebulous pronouncement as "but reporters often lie ..." is pretty much the opposite of "sophisticated."
  - eduah 8y ago

Cthulhu_ 8y ago

You don't, really; there's so many major stakeholders that have an interest in raising or lowering Tesla's stocks, both of which will spend millions to get articles like these published - and shills / trolls to bombard the HN comments with remarks supporting or going against the article and subject.

mgoetzke 8y ago

Well the person in charge of safety at Tesla, Laurie Shelby (https://www.linkedin.com/in/laurie-shelby-cih-csp-8142435/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/laurie-shelby-cih-csp-8142435/), worked at Alcoa before (https://www.businessinsider.com/how-changing-one-habit-quintupled-alcoas-income-2014-4?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/how-changing-one-habit-quint...). Alcoa has a pretty good track record in actually caring. Gaining true knowledge about a situation is not possible without establishing a chain of trust. Whose reporting do you trust ? Each person in the chain needs to be evaluated individually and re-evaluated when new information comes to light. Right now I rather trust what Tesla says when I hear horrendous claims like until proven otherwise. Especially since news media are not independent. They rely almost entirely on advertisement which is a direct relation to "most eyeballs moved away from other 'free' options", which is directly related to the impact of the headline.

josefresco 8y ago

"But reporters often lie" Do you have any evidence to back this up? Citations, studies showing reporters lie .. often?

Dravorek 8y ago

Maybe try to see which one of the two has been sued for libel and/or successfully sued and sanctioned for making false statements on twitter. That might be a decent first approximation.

QuantumGood 8y ago

I diagram the points and counterpoints in a Hacker News thread like this one and determine which seem sufficiently documented and which need additional research. Very important to not put too much weight on points for which there are no counterpoints or significant supporting research regardless of initial "plausibility"

camtarn 8y ago

On the one side, you have a prizewinning independent nonprofit news organisation. And on the other side you have a guy who is stepping down as Tesla CEO after fraud charges, and who's being sued for losing his temper and calling some random cave-diver a paedophile, twice. Personally I trust the news organisation more.

jsight 8y ago
Elon Musk is not stepping down as CEO.
- aembleton 8y ago
  Stepping down as chair but the point still stands.
  - camtarn 8y ago
    Ah, yes. I misread the SEC announcement. Thanks for clarification!

jsight 8y ago

Trust the regulators. They have less of a stake in this than the CEO (who purportedly hates yellow) or the writer (the company that purports the CEO hates yellow). The regulators will insure that corrections take place if the company is really misidentifying, mistreating, and underreporting injuries.

RivieraKid 8y ago

There were two Twitter threads by high-level people at Reveal, defending their Tesla articles. I found them convincing, I have no doubt that Reveal is honest. On the other hand, Elon is notorious to lie and mislead.