3 ms·
I often think Techcrunch should be banned on HN. When I click on a Techrunch link, it tries to redirect me to some tracking url on advertising.com. That would
by TekMol 7y ago
I often think Techcrunch should be banned on HN.
When I click on a Techrunch link, it tries to redirect me to some tracking url on advertising.com. That would probably collect data about me, set cookies and send me back to Techcrunch. Since I do not allow that, I cannot read Techcrunch articles at all.
Lets see what others think. I made an Ask HN from this:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22539255 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22539255
- option 7y agoSame here, doesn’t even work in Firefox focus with the settings I have
- cheeze 7y agoAgree. Techcrunch is almost always just a poorly written article that fails to link to the real source.
- fwip 7y agoWell, it linked to the real source here, above the fold.
- 3pt14159 7y agoIt definitely shouldn't be banned. Techcrunch has many stories where there was something really interesting that they were the first to report. That said, the long tail of TC articles that are rehashes of what's already been written elsewhere do get tiring.
- tylerl 7y agoBeing first to report something is ultimately worthless, and absolutely not what we want to encourage (rushing to publish in order to be first). What matters in actual journalism, and what we should encourage, elevate, and credit, is the BEST reporting. That is, the most accurate, most readable, most informative, most honest. Factors like misleading clickbait, content-free speculation, inflammatory commentary, and poor fact-checking need to disqualify outlets from consideration when determining which news source to promote on a given story. I don't mean necessarily junking a publisher categorically for past sins, but rather looking at each story individually and determining whether someone else is reporting it BETTER.
- forkexec 7y agoAmen. Rushed, sketchy, unverified stories lead to getting the facts wrong and missing implications and the bigger picture. Fools rush in.
- 3pt14159 7y agoIt depends on the nature of the article. I've dated a national award winning journalist that was also the senior editor of the most prestigious magazine in my country (our version of The New Yorker, essentially) and there is a balance to being scooped and really nailing the reporting.
- bobobob420 7y agoHow bout we first ban articles behind paywalls?
- tylerl 7y agoThat should be a given. Linking to a paywalled source for an audience that you can't guarantee are all subscribers is like telling everyone to just trust you that a story exists.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- afiori 7y agoI would not know how to feel about a community that both hates advertising and paywalls, and that also routinely causes DDoS-like spikes of traffic on smaller sites.
- djehh3r7d 7y agoCan we ban Gizmodo and Vox while we're at it? I constantly see Gizmodo peddling the kind of fake news where the headline, the part every journalist knows most readers stop after, is a flat out lie that only becomes defensible because of weasel wording nested midway through the article. And Vox for just being Vox, the only rag I see posted here that abuses histrionics more than them is commondreams.