4 ms·

While I'm also disappointed by many news organizations / journalists these days, NYT is not one of them. In fact, they are one of the few newspapers that are ke

While I'm also disappointed by many news organizations / journalists these days, NYT is not one of them. In fact, they are one of the few newspapers that are keeping larger entities in check and doing their job by reporting them. I've been continually impressed by NYT, specifically, for its care in ensuring the highest level of integrity. Mistakes do happen and as far as I know, they've been pretty good about apologizing for them. If it weren't for this linked article (much of which I learned a significant amount and was news to me), we wouldn't have had such a response from Facebook with further clarification on this topic. For example, did I know they were also passing my private messages to other entities? No. I also don't blame myself because they could've made it a lot more obvious that I was sharing such personal content with other third parties. Journalists have a tough job, but they should be commended when bringing to light articles like this.

porpoisely 8y ago
For me, the nytimes and the big media companies are the biggest disappointments. Smaller and local media companies tend to be far more reliable and trustworthy than large corporations. And integrity isn't a word I'd associate with the nytimes or any major corporation for that matter. They are greedy self-serving entities with their own agenda, like every business. I do believe corporations like the NYTimes and facebook have accrued too much power and are corrupt and a destructive force in the country and the world. I think we need more competition in the traditional media and social media space. For all the talk about monopolies in tech, we talk too little about the monopolies in news and media along with every other industry from agriculture to banking. Also, Facebook is a symptom of a national ( or international ) economic system that applies to pretty much every major industry today. Too much consolidation and too little respect for privacy. Facebook is providing what every industry ( including the news industry ) wants. Information and data. And every industry is invading their own customers' privacy and selling data. Credit card and banks sell your data. The NYTimes sells your data ( after all they sell ads too ).
- IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
  (A) The NYTimes cannot “sell your data” as Facebook does, because it just does not have that data. (B) if you are alluding to their ads, then the local media you praise is just as guilty, and so is any other site financed by ads. They all just include whatever JS snippet the ad platforms give them. (C) The rest of your comment is just repeated assertions that you don’t like the Times. It’s hard to take advise on newspapers seriously, when they come from someone who apparently has not read enough to pick up on the proper handling of spacing around parentheses. (D) Are you making any claim that the story here contains (specific) inaccuracies? Are you accusing the Times of any specific facts being wholesale fabrications? Can you point to any instance of the Times publishing fabricated information? And please don’t use an example that’s old enough to drive, was discovered and disclosed by the Times itself, and resulted in career-ending firings of the reporter responsible.
freshfunk 8y ago
I was a big fan of the NYT. I’ve always considered them a trustworthy source of news. However, their coverage of Facebook since the election has showed me how much bias there is in the media as well as how much an entity can serve their own agenda. Unfortunately the truth behind these integrations are beyond what your average person can understand. Your average person doesn’t understand how OAuth and user consent / permissioning works. And so media can prey on the ignorance of people to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt. NYTimes comes off just as bad as Fox News. I bet you none of the authors have ever implemented 3rd party auth. I doubt any engineers were consulted. Instead they quote so called “media experts” that are just professors at universities who again know nothing about the technical integration and how it works. I’ve seen some people who understand how OAuth works but these are clearly engineers. NYTimes could’ve used the opportunity to explain how people gave consent but instead chooses a different narrative in order to 1) get page views; 2) attack an arguably competitor in the media space and 3) blame FB for getting Trump elected.

porpoisely 8y ago

For me, the nytimes and the big media companies are the biggest disappointments. Smaller and local media companies tend to be far more reliable and trustworthy than large corporations. And integrity isn't a word I'd associate with the nytimes or any major corporation for that matter. They are greedy self-serving entities with their own agenda, like every business. I do believe corporations like the NYTimes and facebook have accrued too much power and are corrupt and a destructive force in the country and the world. I think we need more competition in the traditional media and social media space. For all the talk about monopolies in tech, we talk too little about the monopolies in news and media along with every other industry from agriculture to banking. Also, Facebook is a symptom of a national ( or international ) economic system that applies to pretty much every major industry today. Too much consolidation and too little respect for privacy. Facebook is providing what every industry ( including the news industry ) wants. Information and data. And every industry is invading their own customers' privacy and selling data. Credit card and banks sell your data. The NYTimes sells your data ( after all they sell ads too ).

IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
(A) The NYTimes cannot “sell your data” as Facebook does, because it just does not have that data. (B) if you are alluding to their ads, then the local media you praise is just as guilty, and so is any other site financed by ads. They all just include whatever JS snippet the ad platforms give them. (C) The rest of your comment is just repeated assertions that you don’t like the Times. It’s hard to take advise on newspapers seriously, when they come from someone who apparently has not read enough to pick up on the proper handling of spacing around parentheses. (D) Are you making any claim that the story here contains (specific) inaccuracies? Are you accusing the Times of any specific facts being wholesale fabrications? Can you point to any instance of the Times publishing fabricated information? And please don’t use an example that’s old enough to drive, was discovered and disclosed by the Times itself, and resulted in career-ending firings of the reporter responsible.

freshfunk 8y ago

I was a big fan of the NYT. I’ve always considered them a trustworthy source of news. However, their coverage of Facebook since the election has showed me how much bias there is in the media as well as how much an entity can serve their own agenda. Unfortunately the truth behind these integrations are beyond what your average person can understand. Your average person doesn’t understand how OAuth and user consent / permissioning works. And so media can prey on the ignorance of people to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt. NYTimes comes off just as bad as Fox News. I bet you none of the authors have ever implemented 3rd party auth. I doubt any engineers were consulted. Instead they quote so called “media experts” that are just professors at universities who again know nothing about the technical integration and how it works. I’ve seen some people who understand how OAuth works but these are clearly engineers. NYTimes could’ve used the opportunity to explain how people gave consent but instead chooses a different narrative in order to 1) get page views; 2) attack an arguably competitor in the media space and 3) blame FB for getting Trump elected.