3 ms·

Both WAPO and NYT have a clear editorial and political agenda against Facebook. To add two datapoints to your observation above: "Facebook’s top executive in

Both WAPO and NYT have a clear editorial and political agenda against Facebook. To add two datapoints to your observation above: "Facebook’s top executive in charge of all products, Chris Cox, the longtime confidant of chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, is leaving the company, the highest-level departure at the social media giant amid nearly two years of sustained crises." (WAPO) [1] "Two Facebook Inc. senior executives said Thursday that they would leave the company—surprise departures that come days after CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced a major shift in direction for the company." (WSJ) [2] [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/03/14/facebook-says-its-top-product-executive-chris-cox-is-leaving-highest-level-departure-years https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/03/14/faceboo... [2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-top-facebook-executives-leaving-company-11552594466 https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-top-facebook-executives-lea...

untog 8y ago
> Over the past two years they've published ~14,000 articles each on FB That would mean publishing around 19 articles a day. So, uh, [citation needed]. I'd say that both WaPo and NYT have a clear editorial and political agenda of questioning those with/in power. Silicon Valley companies like Facebook and Google (who have had their own fair share of bad coverage) are enormously powerful, rich companies that own a huge amount of data about all of us. It's only right that they are held to account when they do things with that data that users don't want. It's something Wall Street banks and oil companies have had to bear for a long time.
- o10449366 8y ago
  I rechecked my methodology for those estimates after your comment and have now retracted them for being inaccurate. Thank you for the reality check. Based on an unscientific site-limited Google search of each publication, it looks like all 3 have published ~2,000 articles directly on Facebook within the past 2 years (since March 2017). Many of the WSJ articles are with respect to its business prospects while both the NYT and WAPO feature many anti-FB columns and opinion pieces. I still maintain that NYT in particular has a strong editorial bias against FB and an underlying agenda, but I should definitely do a deeper analysis to support my claim.
- malandrew 8y ago
  > WaPo and NYT have a clear editorial and political agenda of questioning those with/in power. It's just a shame they never apply that agenda to their own industry. The NYTimes and the WaPo have power. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

untog 8y ago

> Over the past two years they've published ~14,000 articles each on FB That would mean publishing around 19 articles a day. So, uh, [citation needed]. I'd say that both WaPo and NYT have a clear editorial and political agenda of questioning those with/in power. Silicon Valley companies like Facebook and Google (who have had their own fair share of bad coverage) are enormously powerful, rich companies that own a huge amount of data about all of us. It's only right that they are held to account when they do things with that data that users don't want. It's something Wall Street banks and oil companies have had to bear for a long time.

o10449366 8y ago
I rechecked my methodology for those estimates after your comment and have now retracted them for being inaccurate. Thank you for the reality check. Based on an unscientific site-limited Google search of each publication, it looks like all 3 have published ~2,000 articles directly on Facebook within the past 2 years (since March 2017). Many of the WSJ articles are with respect to its business prospects while both the NYT and WAPO feature many anti-FB columns and opinion pieces. I still maintain that NYT in particular has a strong editorial bias against FB and an underlying agenda, but I should definitely do a deeper analysis to support my claim.
malandrew 8y ago
> WaPo and NYT have a clear editorial and political agenda of questioning those with/in power. It's just a shame they never apply that agenda to their own industry. The NYTimes and the WaPo have power. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?