I agree. This is exemplified by the author of the original piece that started the media storm, Jeff Bercovici himself, in his sorry excuse of an apologetic arti

I agree. This is exemplified by the author of the original piece that started the media storm, Jeff Bercovici himself, in his sorry excuse of an apologetic article after the suicide (https://www.inc.com/jeff-bercovici/austen-heinz.html https://www.inc.com/jeff-bercovici/austen-heinz.html): "I didn't know anything about Austen Heinz when I met him, except that his behavior seemed to confirm certain notions I had about the way young men in the tech industry too often behave. To wit: They're oblivious to the concerns of women, and blind to their own biases; they talk endlessly about changing the world with technology while building frivolous things; they're arrogant and lacking in tact. I had a mental box marked "Silicon Valley tech bro" and his chatter about making women's sex organs more aesthetically pleasing fit neatly into it." I didn't know anything about about Bercovici until this post on HN but his writing seems to confirm certain notions I have about the way clueless tech media people like him cover "entrepreneurship and innovation" in the Valley (this guy is now SF bureau chef of Inc., BTW) in their trigger-happy, zero-research way. His "breezy article" not only greatly harmed Austen Heinz but also seems to have done so for Audrey Hutchinson, the founder of Sweet Peach, who, after 4 years is now a manager in a NYC art gallery. I hope the clicks Inc. and other media outlets got out of this thread were worth it. And so the bias wars continue to take their toll.