2 ms·

The author isn't trying to convey what's actually happened; they're trying to find a tone which resonates with the majority of readers to drive clicks. This pie

by dymk 7y ago

The author isn't trying to convey what's actually happened; they're trying to find a tone which resonates with the majority of readers to drive clicks. This piece didn't quite resonate, so they'll put out a new story in a few days about how Levandowski is a thief stifling innovation. If the author wanted to report the facts, the headline would be about the court verdict and the nature of the documents stolen, not the author pontificating about Big Evil Tech.

john_brown_body 7y ago
Is this really a thoughtful or useful comment? It's a completely unsubstantiated smear of the writer because you don't agree with his take on the case.
- dymk 7y ago
  It’s identifying what masquerades as factual, unbiased news reporting as a click driven opinion piece, no more and no less
  - john_brown_body 7y ago
    It's not "masquerading as unbiased news reporting", it's a longform magazine essay. Of course the writer, who has been covering this story for years, is going to bring his own perspective to framing the story and exploring the implications of the case. The New Yorker is not a newswire. What's happened here is you saw an article you didn't agree with and invented a completely fictional scenario to justify dismissing it. You're also fundamentally confused about the medium. This seems to be part and parcel with the mindset endemic to HN where any coverage of any issue that doesn't 100% agree with the commentator's preconceptions is assumed to be Wrong and the author either malicious or incompetent.
    - anoncareer0212 7y ago
      Not sure why you're flaming OP repeatedly, Lewandowski's actions aren't remotely in the same moral sphere as merely working in the same area as you always have. It's disturbing to see people whose job it is to inform instead playing games with judging based on tortured analogies. That's what one expects from a freshmen in a mandatory English or philosophy course, not a national publication's longdorm writer.

by dymk 7y ago

john_brown_body 7y ago

Is this really a thoughtful or useful comment? It's a completely unsubstantiated smear of the writer because you don't agree with his take on the case.

dymk 7y ago
It’s identifying what masquerades as factual, unbiased news reporting as a click driven opinion piece, no more and no less
- john_brown_body 7y ago
  It's not "masquerading as unbiased news reporting", it's a longform magazine essay. Of course the writer, who has been covering this story for years, is going to bring his own perspective to framing the story and exploring the implications of the case. The New Yorker is not a newswire. What's happened here is you saw an article you didn't agree with and invented a completely fictional scenario to justify dismissing it. You're also fundamentally confused about the medium. This seems to be part and parcel with the mindset endemic to HN where any coverage of any issue that doesn't 100% agree with the commentator's preconceptions is assumed to be Wrong and the author either malicious or incompetent.
  - anoncareer0212 7y ago
    Not sure why you're flaming OP repeatedly, Lewandowski's actions aren't remotely in the same moral sphere as merely working in the same area as you always have. It's disturbing to see people whose job it is to inform instead playing games with judging based on tortured analogies. That's what one expects from a freshmen in a mandatory English or philosophy course, not a national publication's longdorm writer.