3 ms·

Ok but ... "reportedly" and "didn't respond for comment", so that remains to be seen. I am not downplaying the effects of Facebook on politics though, that's a

by keyle 8y ago

Ok but ... "reportedly" and "didn't respond for comment", so that remains to be seen. I am not downplaying the effects of Facebook on politics though, that's a huge problem. It is true though that in many newspaper sites you'll find an inciendary title labelled "opinion" and that could be anti-anything and very biased with little sources (talking about the posts written by this PR firm). That stuff has to stop. People read it like the news being reported factually and the emphasis on "opinion" is never there.

hnmonkey 8y ago
The word 'opinion' doesn't appear anywhere in the article, much less the whole page. You seem to be implying strongly that this article is fraudulent/biased with no evidence of that. I hope you do realize that news outlets (especially at the size of CNBC) fact-check and try to make sure their stories are vetted. They're not 100% perfect at that for sure, but you seem to be ascribing almost malice to them. 'People read it like the news being reported factually' because it is. That's literally what this is. There shouldn't be emphasis on 'opinion' because it's not an opinion piece. Your take on this news article is however straight up opinion.
- vatueil 8y ago
  I think keyle is suggesting PR campaigns like the one Facebook reportedly ran may publish slanted articles as "opinion" pieces, not that this news story is an opinion piece.
  - hnmonkey 8y ago
    Ahhhhhhhhh. Yes I suppose that is a possible take on what they said. It didn't seem at all clear to me that this was the case from my reading of it. keyle, if this is your message I'm totally sorry about my interpretation.
    - keyle 8y ago
      yes it was, all good :)
      - hnmonkey 8y ago
        Sorry! I really misinterpreted what you meant to say and think we're actually probably of the same mind on all this. Take care.
jasonlotito 8y ago
> reportedly Yes, because the original article is from NYTimes, which did the reporting. And from that article, they have quotes from specific people.
asdff 8y ago
Opinion articles are labelled as such and are written in a different style and tone than other articles. They are written as an argument, not an objective presentation of an event.

by keyle 8y ago

hnmonkey 8y ago

The word 'opinion' doesn't appear anywhere in the article, much less the whole page. You seem to be implying strongly that this article is fraudulent/biased with no evidence of that. I hope you do realize that news outlets (especially at the size of CNBC) fact-check and try to make sure their stories are vetted. They're not 100% perfect at that for sure, but you seem to be ascribing almost malice to them. 'People read it like the news being reported factually' because it is. That's literally what this is. There shouldn't be emphasis on 'opinion' because it's not an opinion piece. Your take on this news article is however straight up opinion.

vatueil 8y ago
I think keyle is suggesting PR campaigns like the one Facebook reportedly ran may publish slanted articles as "opinion" pieces, not that this news story is an opinion piece.
- hnmonkey 8y ago
  Ahhhhhhhhh. Yes I suppose that is a possible take on what they said. It didn't seem at all clear to me that this was the case from my reading of it. keyle, if this is your message I'm totally sorry about my interpretation.
  - keyle 8y ago
    yes it was, all good :)
    - hnmonkey 8y ago
      Sorry! I really misinterpreted what you meant to say and think we're actually probably of the same mind on all this. Take care.

jasonlotito 8y ago

> reportedly Yes, because the original article is from NYTimes, which did the reporting. And from that article, they have quotes from specific people.

asdff 8y ago

Opinion articles are labelled as such and are written in a different style and tone than other articles. They are written as an argument, not an objective presentation of an event.