4 ms·

(A) blanket hatred of “the media” seems to be somewhat misplaced, considering this post itself starts with a link to The Atlantic’s “pretty good post-mortem”.

(A) blanket hatred of “the media” seems to be somewhat misplaced, considering this post itself starts with a link to The Atlantic’s “pretty good post-mortem”. (B) why does this go right to the top on HN, while (as but one example) the recently released, data-driven analyses of the role of social media in the 2016 election get flagged to hell for being “too political” and having “nothing to do with tech”? Likewise, any mention of very real anti-semitism, like a guy shooting up a synagogue, or another guy sleeping in a truck plastered with Trump stickers sending pipe bombs to Jewish people, are almost certain to turn grey faster than a competent President’s hair.

kbenson 8y ago
> (A) blanket hatred of “the media” seems to be somewhat misplaced, considering this post itself starts with a link to The Atlantic’s “pretty good post-mortem”. I didn't read it as hatred of "the media". I read it as "be careful, it's increasingly easy to re-use existing high-quality but poorly known fictional media to support a hoax instead of the entertainment it was designed for." along with "be careful, statistical outliers will happen in large populations, and they make for good news". > (B) why does this go right to the top on HN, while (as but one example) the recently released, data-driven analyses of the role of social media in the 2016 election get flagged to hell for being “too political” Because one is specifically about politics, and the other is about media and communication. This is about tools and techniques which may or may not be political in nature. > and having “nothing to do with tech”? Tech related is not a prerequisite for being on HN.