> I think Zuck "gets it" much more than the reporter does… This assumes the reporter is honest in his writing. Then, of course, it is apparent that Zuckerberg g

> I think Zuck "gets it" much more than the reporter does… This assumes the reporter is honest in his writing. Then, of course, it is apparent that Zuckerberg gets something the reporter doesn't understand, in the way you describe it. But what if, not only is Zuckerberg "evasive and dishonest", but the reporter as well? Is it not to the profit of the reporter to pretend in his writing to not get what Zuckerberg is doing? It very well is! That way the reporter gets to criticise Zuckerberg on the grounds of his actions. That is a case much easier to defend. The reporter may very well discern a form of pretending on the side of Zuckerberg, but how do you prove this? Very hard to do so and risky. It is better writing to be 'dishonest' and call Zuckerberg out on the surface level of his actions. OTOH, it could very well be that the reporter is naive and doesn't discern the true motivations of Zuckerberg's actions. But how can we know?